5 Big Questions from The Da Vinci Code

A brief guide.
by Christianity Today magazine editor Collin Hansen

Download this article as a Free One-Page Guide to hand out and discuss with your family and friends.

Already an international publishing sensation, The Da Vinci Code now is a feature film directed by Ron Howard and starring Tom Hanks. The compelling story written by Dan Brown blurs the line between fact and fiction, so moviegoers have joined readers wondering about the origins and legitimacy of orthodox Christianity. This guide offers brief answers to five important questions.

1. Was Jesus married to Mary Magdalene?
No. Mary Magdalene was certainly close to Jesus. She wept at Jesus’ tomb (John 20). Jesus even entrusted her to return and tell the disciples about his resurrection. But we have no reason to believe they were married. Brown says that Leonardo da Vinci’s Last Supper reveals the secret. He writes that the figure to Jesus’ right, traditionally known as the apostle John, is actually Mary. Not true. Artists often gave characters feminine features to portray youth. John was the youngest of the disciples.

Brown correctly observes that few Jewish men of Jesus’ day did not marry. But why, then, did the apostle Paul, himself celibate, not mention Jesus and Mary when he argued that apostles could marry (1 Cor. 9:5)?

2. What about these alternative gospels that aren’t in the New Testament?
It’s true that the Bible did not arrive as a “fax from heaven,” as Brown writes. The New Testament canon in its current form was first formally attested in 367. Nevertheless, church leaders applied important standards when compiling the Bible. Authors of accepted writings needed to have walked and talked with Jesus, or at least with his leading disciples. Their teaching could not contradict what other apostles had written, and their documents must have been accepted by the entire church, from Jerusalem to Rome. Church leaders considered earlier letters and reports more credible than later documents. Finally, they prayed and trusted the Holy Spirit to guide their decisions.

The so-called Gnostic gospels, many discovered just last century, did not meet these criteria. Many appeared much later than the Bible and were dubiously attributed to major Christian leaders. Their teachings contrasted with what apostles like Paul had written. For example, many Gnostic writings argued that Jesus did not appear in the flesh, because flesh is evil, or they rejected the Old Testament.

3. Were there really competing Christianities during the early church?
Yes—in the sense there were many disputes about the nature of Jesus. And the church has done its best to vanquish challengers to orthodoxy. Once the church decided against the Gnostic writings, they gathered and burned all the Gnostic manuscripts they could find.

Later church councils convened to discuss other threats to Christian orthodoxy. Constantine, the first Roman emperor to make Christianity legal, called the most important of these meetings in 325. Leaders from around the Christian world gathered in Nicea, where they debated Arianism, which taught that God created Jesus. Brown writes that Constantine called this council so he could introduce a new divine Jesus on par with the Father. On the contrary, documents from before Nicea show that most followers of Jesus already called him LORD, the Yahweh of the Old Testament. The church leaders at Nicea rejected Arianism and affirmed that God and Jesus existed together from the beginning in the Trinity. This council produced the first drafts of what became the Nicene Creed, a landmark explanation of Christian belief.

4. What is Opus Dei?
A conservative religious group within the Roman Catholic Church. Opus Dei urges priests and laypeople to strenuously pursue sanctification through everyday discipline. The group has taken criticism for its conservative views, zeal, and secretive practices. There is no evidence that Opus Dei has resorted to murder; nor has the Vatican entrusted Opus Dei to violently guard the church’s deepest secrets, as Dan Brown claims in The Da Vinci Code.

5. Does the Priory of Sion really exist?
Yes, but not as described by Brown. Researchers suspect that members of the real-life Priory of Sion, founded in 1956, forged documents that placed major historical figures—such as Isaac Newton and Leonard da Vinci—in an ancient secret society. There is no evidence for this group beyond dubious documents. Any story relating this group to a dynasty begun by Jesus and Mary Magdalene is a fanciful work of fiction.

Collin Hansen is associate editor of Christianity Today (www.christianitytoday.com). For more Christianity Today coverage, visit www.ChristianityToday.com/go/DaVinci

More Related Training Tools

The Da Vinci Code Special Section
A compiliation of all Christianity Today coverage.
Visit this special section to see all the articles, reviews, and resources that Christianity Today International has created around The Da Vinci Code book and movie. You’ll make better sense of what’s truth and be equipped to respond to your family and friends.
Read more.

Chaplain faces court-martial for praying in uniform at White House

PRESS RELEASE #12: CHAPLAIN KLINGENSCHMITT PUNISHED FOR PRAYING IN UNIFORM
28 APR 06 (www.persuade.tv)
QUESTION: What charges were filed today, Friday, 28 Apr 06?
ANSWER: Captain Lloyd Pyle, Commander of Naval Station Norfolk, revealed his intention to take Chaplain
Klingenschmitt to “Captain’s Mast” on charges that the Chaplain 1) disobeyed orders and 2) violated uniform regs, (Read
charges here): http://persuade.tv/frenzy3/captainsmast.pdf
QUESTION: What counter-charges will soon be filed?
ANSWER: Chaplain Klingenschmitt plans to charge Captain Lloyd Pyle with religious harrassment (for punishing the
chaplain for praying in Jesus name) and reprisals in violation of the Whistleblower Protection Act (for punishing the
chaplain because he appealed to the President.)
QUESTION: When and where did the Chaplain allegedly disobey orders?
ANSWER: On Thursday 30 Mar 06 when he said prayers “in Jesus name” in front of the White House at a press
conference hosted by Chief Justice Roy Moore (story here):
http://persuade.tv/frenzy3/Birmingham31Mar06.pdf
QUESTION: Does the Chaplain agree he disobeyed orders?
ANSWER: Yes, but with written permission. (Read here): http://persuade.tv/frenzy3/ChapsUniformThreats.pdf
QUESTION: What are the Chaplain’s two options?
ANSWER: Either (A) attend Captain’s Mast and accept a “letter of reprimand” that will be permanently filed in his
personnel record, ensuring he never gets promoted again. OR (B) decline Captain’s Mast and defend himself at courtmartial
to prove his innocence.
QUESTION: When and what might Chaplain Klingenschmitt decide?
ANSWER: By 9 am Wednesday 3 May 06 he will choose A or B…but today he’s undecided.
QUESTION: What is Chaplain Klingenschmitt’s reaction to all this?
ANSWER: I believe I’m innocent, and I intend to prove my innocence, at either Mast or Court Martial.
-I had written prior authorization from the Executive Officer to wear my uniform, provided I limited my remarks to prayers,
which I did, so I obeyed his written orders.
-Uniform regulations authorize me to wear the uniform when conducting “religious observances” even outside a chapel
setting, even at secular events.
-My 30 Mar 06 appearance to say prayers outside the White House directly supported my earlier written appeal to the
President, which appeal I made in writing on 15 Dec 05, via my chain of command, but Navy Admirals still today refuse to
forward my letter to the President, now after 4.5 months.
-It’s been ONE FULL YEAR since I went public with allegations that Captain Carr of USS ANZIO punished me for my
prayers and sermons. Most investigations take 45 days to complete, but the Navy has rendered NO DECISION and they’re
still “investigating” the documents I posted online 30 Apr 05.
-Despite my Freedom of Information Act requests, and Congressional inquiries by DOZENS of Congressmen on my behalf,
the Navy has yet to turn over their documents, (instead they’re shredding some), they’ve yet to issue findings, yet to report
to Congress, and yet to justify how 4 senior chaplains persuaded Captain Carr to punish me for my sermons and prayers.
Now they come after me?
QUESTION:
On 7 Jan 06, there was “no problem” with Chaplain Klingenschmitt wearing his uniform (to say prayers in Jesus name) in
front of the White House…
But on 30 Mar 06 there’s a “major problem” with Chaplain Klingenschmitt wearing his uniform (to say prayers in Jesus
name), in front of the White House…WHAT’S THE KEY DIFFERENCE?
ANSWER:
On 21 Feb 06 (in between the above dates), the Secretary of the Navy Donald C. Winter signed a brand-new prayer policy,
mandating that chaplains only pray “in Jesus name” INSIDE a chapel setting, authorizing commanders to punish chaplains
who pray “in Jesus name” OUTSIDE a chapel setting, for disobeying orders.
THIS PROVES THEY’RE ENFORCING THE NEW SECNAV POLICY TO PROHIBIT PRAYERS IN JESUS NAME.
New SECNAV policy bans Christian prayers outside a chapel setting. FRONT PAGE WASH TIMES here:
http://persuade.tv/frenzy2/WashTimes23Mar06.pdf
On 7 Jan 06, the Navy and I agree the event was a “bona fide religious service” setting, safe for Jesus-prayers.
But on 30 Mar 06, the Navy and I agree the event was a “press conference” unsafe for Jesus-prayers.
IF I HAD PRAYED IN UNIFORM INSIDE A CHAPEL SETTING, I WOULDN’T BE PUNISHED TODAY.
SINCE I PRAYED IN UNIFORM AT AN OTHERWISE SECULAR EVENT, I’M BEING PUNISHED.
Chaplain Klingenschmitt didn’t initiate calls to the newspapers today. The Navy, CHINFO, CAPT Pyle and
Rear Admiral McCreary DID BOTH INITIATE to blow this up in the press today. Why?
How can the Navy claim there’s “no coordinated effort” to “get” me, when at 10 am I have charges referred against me, and
by 6 pm the same day I’m getting phone calls from the national media…unless the entire Navy command, legal, and
“information operations” apparatus are deliberately synchronized. And if they’re all synchronized in today’s effort, it
demonstrates deliberate forethought and malice in their effort to discredit me and humiliate me.
When Congress seizes their emails, will it prove the Admirals conspired? What emails are they deleting to hide from
Congress, right now?
With everything going on in the Global War on Terror around the world in the US Navy, the most important issue they
could find to call the Washington Post about was an alleged uniform infraction by Chaplain Klingenschmitt, which should
at worst merit a minor administrative correction, but instead merits threats of court-martial, and calls to the national media?
Why are they trying to swat a fly with a sledge-hammer? Is all this Navy-created drama really necessary, over a minor
uniform infraction? Do they really plan to court-martial me for saying prayers in uniform, and appealing to the President?
Do they still maintain my prayers in Jesus’ name were “personal partisan religious views” inappropriate to speak in
uniform? (I only prayed from the Bible-Acts 4, and the Book of Common Prayer, read my speech here:
http://persuade.tv/frenzy3/RevRobSchenckSpeech.pdf ).
Again the Navy spokesman lied to the press, claiming I’d never be punished for the events of 30 Mar 06, Read here:
http://persuade.tv/frenzy3/WashDateLine14Apr06.pdf
They say chaplains can pray in Jesus name, they just can’t do it outside a chapel setting.
They say chaplains can pray in Jesus name outside the chapel, they just can’t wear a uniform while doing it.
They say we can support and defend the Constitution, just don’t wear a uniform while doing it.
Enough is enough. I wear a cross on my uniform, I pray in Jesus name, and I my on-duty efforts (in uniform) honor the
Constitution which they trample underfoot.
First I was punished (in writing) for my prayers and sermons. Now I’m punished for blowing the whistle.
I’VE DOCUMENTED 25 ACTS OF REPRISALS AGAINST A WHISTLEBLOWER AT THIS COMMAND, punishing
me because I appealed to Congress and the President. More details to come…
The Navy tries to discredit me, shifting attention, only because they still today FAIL TO PROVIDE JUSTICE. They’d
rather hide their own embarrassment by deflecting attention away from their religious harassment of my faith.
Does anybody think Navy leaders will EVER hold Captain Carr accountable, for punishing his chaplain for quoting the
Bible in the chapel? Is Captain Carr above the law? Does Captain Pyle protect him, by taking reprisals on me, to punish
me for appealing to the President, and for saying prayers in uniform?
Stay tuned…Court-martials are open to the public…and I could call upon many, many eye-witnesses.
CALL CHAPLAIN KLINGENSCHMITT FOR INTERVIEWS: 719-360-5132 CELL
chaplaingate@yahoo.com

Florida Senate Scraps Bill to Expand Term Limits

By BRENT KALLESTAD
Associated Press Writer

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — Eight is still enough for the Florida Senate.

A year after passing a resolution to give voters a chance to extend
office limits for legislators and Cabinet officers from eight to 12
years, the Senate took it back on a 26-14 vote Friday.

But it wasn’t easy.

Sen. Bill Posey’s bid to pull the measure (SJR 2788) off the November
ballot didn’t have enough support earlier in the day, and he
postponed a vote on the measure to get time to round up enough
support to repeal last year’s effort.

When Posey, R-Rockledge, returned home from the 2005 legislative
session, he received an earful from constituents who told him they’d
already voted on the proposal. In 1992, Florida voters overwhelmingly
passed an “Eight is Enough” initiative that established the limit on
how long an individual can serve in the same legislative or Cabinet
office.

“Clearly the voters in Florida wants to stay with eight years,” added
Sen. Jim Sebesta, R-St. Petersburg, who like Posey said he made a
mistake voting to extend term limits to 12 years.

Opponents of the eight-year term limit, however, believe the cap
gives lobbyists and legislative staff an advantage in working the
sometimes complicated system of creating and passing bills.

“It has a lot to do with a brain drain,” said Sen. Frederica Wilson,
D-Miami, who supported extending term limits. “Before we know it, at
this pace, lobbyists will be running the Legislature.”

Senate Democrats like Wilson were unified Friday in animated debate
about letting voters decide if 12 years would better serve citizens,
if not the politicians.

“Many of the people in our districts did not realize what they were
voting on,” argued Sen. Al Lawson, D-Tallahassee. “They thought they
were voting on limits on Congress people.”

Although many Republican lawmakers also favor a 12-year term for
lawmakers, Gov. Jeb Bush and House Speaker Allan Bense are among some
of the leading Republicans who prefer the eight year limit for
legislators and Cabinet officers.

Bush, however, has no formal role in proposals to put issues on the
ballot.

The House must still vote on the measure as well.

Some Republicans are also worried that a bill giving politicians more
time in office could be overwhelmingly rejected in November, possibly
adversely affecting other candidates and issues on the ticket.

But Posey’s efforts carried the hour Friday.

“We need dynamic change,” Posey said. “We need fresh ideas.”

Does God require Sabbath-keeping of Christians?

Question: “Does God require Sabbath-keeping of Christians?”

Answer: In Colossians 2:16-17, the Apostle Paul declared, “Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.” Similarly, Romans 14:5 says, “One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.” These Scriptures make it clear, for the Christian, Sabbath-keeping is a matter of spiritual freedom, not a command from God. Sabbath-keeping is an issue on which God’s Word instructs us not to judge each other. Sabbath-keeping is a matter that each and every Christian needs to by fully convinced in his/her own mind.

In the early chapters of the Book of Acts, the first Christians were predominantly Jews. When Gentiles began to receive the gift of salvation through Jesus Christ, the Jewish Christians had a dilemma. What aspects of the Mosaic Law and Jewish tradition should Gentile Christians be instructed to obey? The apostles met and discussed the issue in the Jerusalem council (Acts chapter 15). The decision was, “It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood” (Acts 15:19-20). Sabbath-keeping was not one of the commands that Jesus’ apostles felt it was necessary to enforce on Gentile believers. It is inconceivable that the apostles would neglect to include Sabbath-keeping if it was still God’s command for Christians to observe the Sabbath day.

A common error in the Sabbath-keeping debate is the concept that the Sabbath was the day of worship. Groups such as the Seventh Day Adventists holds that God requires the church service to be held on Saturday, the Sabbath day. That is not what the Sabbath command was. The Sabbath command was to do no work on the Sabbath day (Exodus 20:8-11). Nowhere in Scripture is the Sabbath day commanded to be the day of worship. Yes, Jews in Old Testament, New Testament, and modern times use Saturday as the day of worship – but that is not the essence of the Sabbath command. In the Book of Acts, whenever a meeting is said to be on the Sabbath, it is a meeting of Jews, not Christians. When did the early Christians meet? Acts 2:46-47 gives us the answer, “Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.” If there was a day that Christians met regularly, it was the first day of the week, not the Sabbath day (Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 16:2). In honor of Christ’s resurrection on Sunday, the early Christians observed Sunday, not as the “Christian Sabbath,” but as a day to especially worship and glorify Jesus Christ.

Is there anything wrong with worshipping on Saturday, the Sabbath? Absolutely not! We should worship God every day, not just on Saturday or Sunday! Many churches today have both Saturday and Sunday services. There is freedom in Christ (Romans 8:21; 2 Corinthians 3:17; Galatians 5:1). Should a Christian practice Sabbath-keeping, that is, not working on Saturdays? If a Christian feels led to do so, absolutely, yes (Romans 14:5). However, those who choose to practice Sabbath-keeping should not judge those who do not keep the Sabbath (Colossians 2:16). Further, those who do not keep the Sabbath should avoid being a stumbling block (1 Corinthians 8:9) to those who do keep the Sabbath. Galatians 5:13-15 sums up the whole issue, “You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love. The entire law is summed up in a single command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.”

Rush Limbaugh: ‘Not Guilty’

The State Attorney’s Office and Rush Limbaugh have reached an agreement whereby a single count charge of doctor shopping filed Friday will be dismissed in 18 months.

Friday, April 28, 2006

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) Rush Limbaugh was arrested Friday on prescription drug charges. Limbaugh turned himself in to authorities on a warrant issued by the State Attorney’s Office, said Teri Barbera, a spokeswoman for the State Attorney’s Office. The conservative radio commentator came into the jail at about 4 p.m. with his attorney Roy Black and bonded out an hour later on a $3,000 bail. The warrant was for fraud to conceal information to obtain prescription, Barbera said. Black said his client and authorities reached a settlement on a single-count charge of “doctor shopping ” — or illegally deceiving multiple doctors to receive overlapping prescriptions — filed by the state attorney, which will be dismissed in 18 months. Limbaugh maintains he’s innocent. He has acknowledged he became addicted to pain medication, blaming it on severe back pain. He took a five-week leave from his radio show to enter a rehabilitation program in 2003.

Black released the following statement, which is quoted in full:

“I am pleased to announce that the State Attorney’s Office and Mr. Limbaugh have reached an agreement whereby a single count charge of doctor shopping filed today by the State Attorney will be dismissed in 18 months. As a primary condition of the dismissal, Mr. Limbaugh must continue to seek treatment from the doctor he has seen for the past two and one half years. This is the same doctor under whose care Mr. Limbaugh has remained free of his addiction without relapse.

“Mr. Limbaugh and I have maintained from the start that there was no doctor shopping, and we continue to hold this position. Accordingly, we filed today with the Court a plea of ‘Not Guilty’ to the charge filed by the State.

“As part of this agreement, Mr. Limbaugh also has agreed to make a $30,000 payment to the State of Florida to defray the public cost of the investigation. The agreement also provides that he must refrain from violating the law during this 18 months, must pay $30 per month for the cost of “supervision” and comply with other similar provisions of the agreement.

“Mr. Limbaugh had intended to remain in treatment. Thus, we believe the outcome for him personally will be much as if he had fought the charge and won.”

The actions taken today are as follows:

The State Attorney has filed a single charge of doctor shopping with the Court. The charge is being held in abeyance under the terms of an agreement between the State and Mr. Limbaugh. Mr. Limbaugh has filed a plea of “Not Guilty” with the Court. The formal agreement between Mr. Limbaugh and the State Attorney will be filed with the Court on Monday. The terms of the agreement are substantively as follows:

· Mr. Limbaugh will continue in treatment with the doctor he has seen for the past two and one half years.

· After Mr. Limbaugh completes an additional 18 months of treatment, the State Attorney has agreed to drop the charge.

· Mr. Limbaugh has agreed to make a $30,000 payment to the State of Florida to defray the public cost of the investigation.

Governor Bush approves 2006 hurricane preparedness sales tax holiday

TALLAHASSEE — Governor Jeb Bush has signed legislation authorizing Florida’s second annual 12-day sales tax holiday for hurricane preparedness. The Hurricane Preparedness Sales Tax Holiday is an important component of Governor Bush’s comprehensive plan to instill a “culture of preparedness” in Florida. Prepared citizens are better equipped to provide for the safety of their families, reduce damage to their homes and recover more quickly from a disaster.

“In this period of increased tropical activity, it is vital for all Floridians to prepare,” said Governor Bush. “Families and businesses that prepare are safer and recover quicker than those who don’t plan and don’t take action.”

Coinciding with National Hurricane Preparedness Week, the tax holiday begins on Saturday, May 21 and ends on the first day of the 2006 Hurricane Season, June 1 — just 35 days away. The 12-day holiday will save Floridians an estimated $41 million. Under the legislation, no state or local sales tax will be collected on hurricane preparedness items, including:

• Flashlights and portable, self-powered light sources — $20 or less
• Portable radios, two-way radios and weather-band radios — for $50 or less
• Flexible waterproof sheeting (tarps) — $50 or less
• Gas or diesel fuel containers — $25 or less
• Batteries — $30 or less
• Non-electrical food storage coolers — $30 or less
• Portable generators — $1,000 or less
• Carbon monoxide detectors — $75 or less
• Storm shutter devices — $200 or less
• Cell phone batteries — $60 or less

“This legislation is an incentive for Floridians to stock up on supplies, as well as a reminder to prepare for the safety of their families,” said Senator Carey Baker.

“We’ve learned the hard way how important it is to prepare early and thoroughly for hurricane season,” said Representative Ron Greenstein. “This measure will grant Floridians a tax break on much needed hurricane supplies and hopefully increase the number of people prepared for this year’s hurricane season.”

The Hurricane Preparedness Sales Tax Holiday is a key component of the hurricane preparedness, response and recovery budget recommendations made by Governor Jeb Bush and Lt. Governor Toni Jennings. The recommendations include new efforts to significantly enhance Florida’s ability to prepare for hurricanes, respond quickly in the aftermath of a storm, recover from the damage and impacts to the economy and mitigate future threats to public safety and infrastructure. The $565 million package includes funding to harden county emergency operations centers, make existing homes more disaster resistant, install permanent generators in all special needs shelters, create safe public shelter for an additional 100,000 people, repair and rehabilitate homes in communities severely impacted by the 2004 and 2005 storms and raise public awareness on the critical need to prepare for hurricanes.

Hurricane Preparedness Sales Tax Holiday
May 21 through June 1, 2006

Florida law provides that no sales tax or discretionary sales surtax (also known as a local option sales tax) will be collected on the sale or purchase of certain items related to hurricane preparedness for the period beginning 12:01 a.m., Sunday, May 21, 2006, and ending at midnight, Thursday, June 1, 2006.

This special sales tax holiday DOES NOT apply to clothing, books, or school supplies.

The sales tax exemption applies to each eligible item, regardless of the number of items sold on the same invoice to a customer. If the sales price of a qualifying item exceeds the allowable threshold amount (listed below) this tax exemption will not apply and the total purchase price is subject to tax. The exemption DOES NOT apply to the leasing of a qualified item.

The following items are specifically identified as being eligible for this special sales tax holiday for hurricane preparedness:

Qualifying items selling for $10 or less:

• Blue ice or those items sold as artificial ice

Qualifying items selling for $20 or less:

• Any portable self-powered light source
• Battery-powered flashlights
• Battery-powered lanterns
• Gas-powered lanterns (including propane, kerosene, lamp oil, or similar fuel)
• Tiki type torches
• Candles

Qualifying items selling for $25 or less:

• Any gas or diesel fuel container (including LP gas and kerosene containers)

Qualifying items selling for $30 or less:

• Batteries, including rechargeable (listed sizes only)
  • AAA-cell
  • AA-cell
  • C-cell
  • D-cell
  • 6-volt (excluding automobile and boat batteries)
  • 9-volt (excluding automobile and boat batteries)
• Coolers (food-storage; non-electrical)
• Ice chests (food-storage; non-electrical)

Qualifying items selling for $40 or less:

• Any cell phone charger

Qualifying items selling for $50 or less:

• Radios (self-powered or battery-powered)
• Two-way radios (self-powered or battery-powered)
• Weather band radios (self-powered or battery-powered)
• Tarpaulins (tarps)
• Visqueen, plastic sheeting, plastic drop cloths, and other flexible waterproof sheeting
• Ground anchor systems
• Tie-down kits (items that are advertised or normally sold as a tie-down or anchoring kit)
• Bungee cords
• Ratchet straps

Qualifying items selling for $60 or less:

• Any cell phone batteries

Qualifying items selling for $75 or less:

• Any carbon monoxide detectors
• Any package consisting of two or more of the previously listed qualifying hurricane-preparedness items sold for $75 or less will qualify for the exemption.
• Any package consisting of one or more of the previously listed hurricane-preparedness items and at least one other item that is otherwise tax-exempt and the package is sold for $75 or less will qualify for the exemption.

Qualifying items selling for $200 or less:

• Storm shutter devices (defined as materials and products specifically manufactured, rated, and marketed for the purpose of preventing window damage from storms)

Qualifying items selling for $1,000 or less:

• Portable generators that will be used to provide light, communications, or to preserve perishable food in the event of a power outage.

This exemption does not apply to sales of items within a theme park, entertainment complex, a public lodging establishment, or airports.

“Theme park or entertainment complex” means a complex comprised of at least 25 adjacent acres owned and controlled by the same business entity and which contains permanent exhibitions and a variety of recreational activities and has a minimum of one million visitors annually.

“Public lodging establishment” means any unit, group of units, dwelling, building, or group of buildings within a complex of buildings, which is rented to guests more than three times in a calendar year for periods of less than 30 days or one calendar month, whichever is less, or which is advertised or offered to the public as a place regularly rented to guests.

“Airport” means any area of land or water, or any man-made object or facility located thereon, which is used, or intended for use, for the landing and takeoff of aircraft, and any attached areas which are used, or intended for use, for airport buildings or other airport facilities or rights-of-way, together with all airport buildings and facilities located thereon.

Note: Battery-powered or gas-powered light sources and qualifying portable self-powered radios will qualify for the exemption even though they may have electrical cords.

Applying the Hurricane Preparedness Sales Tax Holiday

Articles that are normally sold as a unit may qualify for the tax exemption provided the individual items are specifically listed as tax exempt and the price of the package is $75 or less.

• Example 1: A multi-battery package sells for $35. The package contains an assortment of AAA, AA, C, and D cell batteries. The battery package can be rung up at the register as a package and still qualify for the tax exemption since the sales price of the package containing qualifying items is less than $75.

• Example 2: A ground tie-down kit with 4 tie-downs and related accessories sells for $100. The kit cannot be rung up as 4 different packages in order for each to qualify for the exemption.

When tax-exempt hurricane-preparedness items are sold together with items that are normally tax-exempt as a single set, unit, product, or package, and the package sells for $75 or less, the entire package qualifies for the exemption.

• Example: A package sells for $55 which contains a cooler and a 24-pack of bottled water. Since this package contains one item that qualifies for the hurricane preparedness tax exemption (a non-electrical cooler) and one item that is normally tax-exempt (bottled water) and the package sells for $75 or less, this transaction will be tax exempt during the Hurricane Preparedness Sales Tax Holiday Period.

When a package contains tax-exempt hurricane-preparedness items and it also contains taxable items that do not qualify for the hurricane-preparedness sales tax holiday, the full sales price of the package is subject to sales tax.

• Example 1: Four AA rechargeable batteries are sold in a package that includes a battery charger for $25. Although the batteries would qualify for this exemption if sold separately, the battery charger would NOT qualify because it is not listed as a qualifying tax exempt item. The full selling price of $25 is taxable.

• Example 2: A flashlight is sold with a travel mug as a package. Although the flashlight would qualify for the exemption if sold separately, the travel mug would NOT qualify because it is not listed as a qualifying tax exempt item. The full selling price of the flashlight and mug package is taxable.

The total price of items advertised as “buy one, get one free,” or “buy one, get one for a reduced price,” cannot be averaged together in order for both items to qualify for the exemption.

The sale of a gift certificate/card is not taxable. Eligible items purchased during the exemption period using a gift certificate/card will still qualify for the exemption, regardless of when the gift certificate/card was purchased. Eligible items purchased after the exemption period using a gift certificate/card are taxable even if the gift certificate/card was purchased during the exemption period. A gift certificate/card CANNOT be used to reduce the selling price of an item in order to qualify for the exemption.

When a customer purchases a qualifying item during the exemption period, then later exchanges the item for the same item, no tax will be due, even if the exchange is made after the exemption period.

When a customer uses a store credit during the exemption period on qualified tax-exempt items, the purchase will be exempt from sales tax. When a customer uses a store credit issued during the exemption period and the tax-exempt period has expired, the appropriate sales tax will apply to the full sales price of the newly purchased item.

A customer who pays sales tax to a retailer on a qualifying item when no tax is due must secure a refund of the tax from the retailer and not from the Department of Revenue.

When a customer returns a qualifying item during the period of June 2, 2006, through August 31, 2006, and wants a refund/credit for tax paid:

• The customer must produce a receipt or invoice showing tax was paid on the original purchase of the qualifying item, or

• The retailer must have sufficient documentation to show that tax was paid on the original purchase of the qualifying item.

Manufacturer’s coupons do not reduce the sales price of an item. Therefore, a manufacturer’s coupon cannot be used to reduce the selling price of a qualifying item in order for the item to qualify for the exemption.

Store coupons and discounts do reduce the sales price of an item. Therefore, a store coupon or discount can be used to reduce the sales price of a qualifying item to the “allowable threshold amount” in order for the item to qualify for the tax exemption.

Rebates occur after the sale and do not affect the sales price of an item purchased.

Eligible items purchased during the exemption period using a rain check will qualify for the exemption regardless of when the rain check was issued. However, issuance of a rain check during the exemption period will not qualify an eligible item for the exemption if the item is actually purchased after the exemption period.

A layaway sale is a transaction in which merchandise is set aside for future delivery to a customer who makes a deposit, agrees to pay the balance of the purchase price over a period of time, and receives the merchandise at the end of the payment period. For purposes of this exemption, qualified items will be eligible for the exemption if a retailer and a customer enter into a contract for a layaway sale during the exemption period, the customer makes the usual deposit in accordance with the retailer’s layaway policy, and the merchandise is segregated from the retailer’s inventory. If the final payment on a layaway order is made and the merchandise is given to the customer during the exemption period, that sale of qualified items will be eligible for the exemption, even when the qualified items were placed on layaway before the exemption period.

Rental of any of the items specified in this publication does not qualify for an exemption.

For purposes of this exemption, eligible items purchased by mail order (including transactions made over the Internet) will receive the exemption if the order is accepted by the mail-order company during the exemption period for immediate shipment. When the acceptance of the order by the mail-order company occurs during the exemption period, the exemption will apply even if delivery is made after the exemption period.

• An order is accepted by the mail-order company when the mail-order company has taken an action to fill the order for immediate shipment. Actions to fill an order include placing an “in-date” stamp on a mail-order or assigning an “order number” to a telephone order.

• An order is considered to be for immediate shipment when delayed shipment is not requested by the customer. An order is for immediate shipment notwithstanding that the shipment may be delayed because of a backlog of orders or because stock is currently unavailable to, or on back order by, the company.

Shipping and handling charges are included as part of the sales price of the eligible item, whether or not separately stated. If multiple items are shipped on a single invoice, to determine if any items qualify for the exemption, the shipping and handling charge must be proportionately allocated to each item ordered and identified separately on the invoice.

Repairs to qualifying items do not qualify for the exemption.

For Bay County Dealers Only

Panama City and Panama City Beach impose upon retailers a merchant’s license fee or similar gross receipts tax or fee, which may be passed on to the customer. The merchant’s license fee is included in the sales price of each item whether or not the fee is separately stated on the invoice.

• Example: An ice chest (non-electrical type) sells for $29.95. The separately stated 1% gross receipts fee for this item is $0.30. Since the gross receipts fee is part of the sales price of the item ($30.25), the cost of the ice chest exceeds the allowable threshold amount and, therefore, will

DNC Chair Tells Churches to Shut Up When it Comes to Politics

April 24, 2006

by Pete Winn, associate editor

Howard Dean says tax-exempt status exempts Christian groups from speaking out.

The Chairman of the Democratic National Committee said he thinks churches should either pay taxes or be silent when it comes to speaking out about political issues.

In an interview with the Christian Science Monitor, Howard Dean said “The religious community has to decide whether they want to be tax-exempt or involved in politics.”

Dr. James Dobson, the founder and chairman of Focus on the Family Action, told Fox News Channel’s Neil Cavuto last week he couldn’t believe the former Vermont governor would make such a comment.

“I wonder if anybody in the country takes him seriously anymore,” Dobson told Cavuto. “He gives new meaning to the term, ‘off the wall.’ “

Dobson said he doubted Dean had thought through the implications of his statement.

“I wonder if he would have opposed the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., in speaking out on the issue of civil rights,” Dobson said. “If it were 1859, would you not speak out on slavery as a pastor? I wonder if he really does oppose the Rev. Al Sharpton or the Rev. Jesse Jackson from speaking. He’s obviously aiming his remarks at those who come from a conservative viewpoint, but you simply can’t make that fly with the law.”

Dobson also pointed out that radical billionaire financier George Soros spent $50 million to try to influence the Democrats in the last general election — and that some of his money comes from tax-exempt sources.

“Are they telling me that he can speak out on the great moral issues of our time and on the things he believes in public, but I can’t because I’m a Christian?” Dobson asked. “That doesn’t make any sense, at all.”

Steve Crampton, chief counsel of the American Family Association’s Center for Law and Policy, said Dean’s comments reflect the fear some liberals have of the power of evangelical Christians.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if Mr. Dean doesn’t have a larger following, albeit a minority one, on this issue than we might otherwise suspect,” Crampton told Family News in Focus.

Joseph Cella, president of Fidelis, a Catholic public-policy group, said Dean’s statement makes it clear that he wants to muzzle America’s churches and religious groups.

“When it comes to debates over public policy and issues,” he said, “Dean should be welcoming the voice of America’s churches, not attempting to silence them. Instead Dean has shown utter disregard for people of faith by threatening the historical and treasured role of religious groups and churches in American public life.”

Ironically, Dean has met with numerous liberal religious leaders to talk politics, such as the Rev. Luis Cortes, the founder and executive director of the Hispanic Clergy of Philadelphia — and he has spoken to the National Baptist Convention of America and the convention of the African Methodist Episcopal Church.

Moreover, the DNC’s Web site, democrats.org, has a section devoted to “religious communities.”

Jared Leland, legal counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberties, also takes issue with Dean. Unfortunately, he said, there are many people who suffer from the same misconception. He said argued that when pastors speak from the pulpit, they are engaging in an internal church communication — one the Founders intended to be free from government interference.

“Ministers, rabbis, priests and preachers have a First Amendment right to preach anything — left, right or center, wisdom or nonsense — from the pulpit to their congregations,” he said, “whether it be politically motivated or otherwise.

“The First Amendment right of preaching from the pulpit to the congregation without being censored by the government — or otherwise penalized by the government — is afforded the highest protection under the Constitution. It is something that cannot be negotiated, and it is something that cannot be compromised.”

Leland said outside the pulpit, the footing is less secure. If a church takes out newspaper or TV ads supporting or opposing a candidate, for example, it might legitimately be accused of “intervening” in a political campaign. But within the confines of the church itself, ministers need the freedom to talk about whatever they will. And those who believe that churches should surrender that freedom are at odds with the Founders.

FOR MORE INFORMATION:
To learn more about the First Amendment and what the separation of church and state does and does not mean, check out the Alliance Defense Fund’s Web site.

In addition, America’s God and Country, by William Federer, as an excellent look into the religious nature of the founding of the republic.

(NOTE: Referral to Web sites not produced by Focus on the Family is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an endorsement of the sites’ content.)

Quote

“Saying that Dan Brown’s book is about Christianity is like saying
Finding Nemo is about marine biology. We have just as much evidence
to suggest that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene as we
have that clown fish talk. “

– Kenneth Boa & John Alan Turner
The Gospel According to The Davinci Code: The Truth Behind the Writings of Dan Brown

Tony Snow to Be Named White House Press Secretary

Tony Snow to Be Named White House Press Secretary

Legislators may scrap proposal to extend term limits to 12 years

By Jason Garcia
Tallahassee Bureau

April 25, 2006

TALLAHASSEE · Florida legislators might agree that “Eight is Enough” after all.

Momentum is building in the Legislature to scrap a proposed constitutional amendment it overwhelmingly approved a year ago that would ask voters to extend term limits for legislators from eight to 12 years.

After having been stuck for weeks in the Senate’s Ethics and Elections Committee, a bill that would yank the amendment off the November ballot suddenly breezed through the panel Monday by a 5-1 vote. Leaders in both chambers acknowledged that many more legislators are having second thoughts about the issue.

“I am hearing from some members that perhaps we should reconsider that,” House Speaker Allan Bense said. “It’s being talked about.”

The original proposal sailed through the Legislature a year ago, passing the House by a 92-24 vote and the Senate by a 35-4 margin.

Supporters argued that the current limit of eight years, which voters approved in 1992 after a campaign that featured the slogan “Eight is Enough,” has led to a brain drain in the Legislature. That, they said, has stripped legislators of the experience needed for the often-complex lawmaking process and transferred too much influence to corporate lobbyists and legislative staffers.

But now many of those same legislators — some of whom are running for higher office this year — appear to be rethinking the idea of sharing the ballot with a proposal that could spark turnout among angry, anti-politician voters.

“I still think that it [the 1992 amendment] was the wrong thing to do, but it was something the people voted on,” said Sen. Walter “Skip” Campbell, D-Fort Lauderdale, who voted Monday to remove the amendment from this year’s ballot.

Campbell, who is running for attorney general, supported the measure a year ago.

Sen. Dan Webster, R-Winter Garden, the Legislature’s longest-serving current member, was more blunt.

“I think it would be a good idea to take it off the ballot. Because it’s going to lose big-time,” said Webster, who, like Campbell, voted for the term-limits extension a year ago.

Legislators insisted they weren’t changing their minds because they are worried about election-year fallout. Rather, they said they have come to realize that there is overwhelming voter opposition to the idea.

Paul Jacob, a spokesman for U.S. Term Limits, which promotes such restrictions across the country, said legislators have reason to worry if the measure stays n the ballot.

“No doubt, they’re scared to death that the people of Florida are going to figure out exactly what they put on the ballot. The voters are going to be angry,” Jacob said. “They may have realized that they’re not going to get their hand back out of the cookie jar.”

Jason Garcia can be reached at jrgarcia@orlandosentinel.com or 850-222-5564.

Is it wrong to have pictures of Jesus?

Question: “Is it wrong to have pictures of Jesus?”

Answer: When trying to decide what, if any, Christian imagery is appropriate to place in our homes, a good place to begin is the Ten Commandments. When God first gave His law to mankind, He began with Himself, a statement of who He is (“the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt”), and a warning that we are to have no other God but Him. He immediately followed that by forbidding the making of any image of anything “in heaven above or on earth beneath or in the waters below,” for the purpose of worshipping or bowing down to it. The fascinating thing about the history of the Jewish people is that they disobeyed this commandment more than any other. Again and again, they made idols to represent God and worshipped them, beginning with the creation of the golden calf at the very moment God was writing the Ten Commandments on tablets for Moses! (Exodus 32) Idol worship not only drew the Israelites away from the true and living God, it led to all manner of sins including temple prostitution and orgies, and even the sacrificing of children to these false gods.

The God who created us, and who knows how deeply we are affected by sin, understands our desire to condense Him into a form we can see and understand. Perhaps it is the fact that our limited minds simply cannot comprehend that which is infinite and eternal. Or, more likely, perhaps we are simply more comfortable when we can reduce God to a more manageable form, such as a picture or a statue. Man has always attempted to humanize God, to make Him over in our own image and bring Him down to our level. After all, if God is just like us, it stands to reason that we are just like Him, a very appealing concept (certainly popular today) and the same lie Satan has been feeding us since the Garden of Eden when he tempted Eve to eat of the forbidden tree: “You shall be like God” (Genesis 3:5).

Just as making idols led the Israelites away from the true worship of God, hanging a portrait of Jesus in our homes would seem to present a continual temptation to reduce Him to nothing more than the image in the picture. Even if we are not bowing down and worshipping the picture, how can we not eventually equate Him in our minds with this simple image? How can we look at it every day and not be tempted to see Him as merely the figure in the picture? But can we possibly reduce Christ’s nature, character and power to a two-dimensional, eight by ten portrait? In addition, most of the “portraits” of Jesus portray Him in a softened, quasi-romantic style as a handsome and winsome young man while, in fact, He “had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him” (Isaiah 53:2). If it were important for us to know what He really did look like, Matthew, Peter and John, who spent three years with Him, would certainly be able to give us an accurate description, as would His own brother, Jude. Yet, these New Testament writers offer no details about His physical attributes. Does this not suggest that, inspired by the Holy Spirit, they did so in order to carefully avoid encouraging us to make any image of Him?

We certainly don’t need a picture to display to us the nature of our Lord and Savior. We have only to look at the creation, as we are reminded in Psalm 19:1-2: “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the expanse proclaims His handiwork. Day to day pours forth speech, and night to night reveals knowledge.” In addition, our very existence as the redeemed of the Lord, sanctified and made righteous by His blood shed on the cross for our sins, should have Him always before eyes and minds.

The Bible, the very Word of God, is also filled with images of Christ that capture our imaginations and thrill our souls. He is the Light of the world (John 1:4-5); the very Bread of life (John 6:32-33); the living Water that quenches the thirst of our souls (John 4:14); the High Priest who intercedes for us with the Father (Hebrews 2:17); the Good Shepherd who lays down His life for us, His sheep (John 10:11,14); the spotless Lamb of God slain before the foundation of the world (Revelation 13:8), the Author and Perfecter of our faith (Hebrews 12:2); the Way, the Truth, the Life (John 14:6); and the very image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15). How can we even consider reducing Him to a piece of paper and hanging Him on the wall?

Recommended Resource: Why Believe in Jesus?: Who He Is, What He Did, and His Message for You Today by Tim LaHaye.

Is the Allah of Islam the God of the Bible?

by: Hank Hanegraaff

“No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also.” (1 John 2:23 NIV)

Long before Muhammad was born, Arabic Christians were already referring to God as Allah — and millions continue to do so today. The Allah of Islam, however, is definitely not the God of the Bible; for while Muslims passionately defend the unity of God, they patently deny His triunity. They recoil at the notion of God as Father, reject the unique deity of Jesus Christ the Son, and renounce the divine identity of the Holy Spirit.

First, while Jesus taught His disciples to pray “Our Father in heaven,” devotees of Muhammad find the very notion offensive. To their way of thinking, calling God “Father” and Jesus Christ “Son” suggests sexual procreation. According to the Qur’an, “It is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son” (Sura 19:35); and Allah “begetteth not, nor is he begotten” (Sura 112:3). The Bible, however, does not use the term “begotten” with respect to the Father and the Son in the sense of sexual reproduction but rather in the sense of special relationship; thus, when the apostle John speaks of Jesus as “the only begotten of the Father” (John 1:14 KJV, emphasis added), he is underscoring the unique deity of Christ. John goes on to state, “No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father’s side, has made him known” (John 1:18 NIV). When the apostle Paul likewise refers to Jesus as “the firstborn over all creation” (Colossians 1:15 NIV, emphasis added), he is emphasizing Christ’s preeminence or prime position as the Creator of all things (cf. vv. 16–19). Christians are sons of God through adoption; Jesus is God the Son from all eternity.

Muslims, furthermore, dogmatically denounce the Christian declaration of Christ’s unique deity as the unforgivable sin of shirk. As the Qur’an puts it, “Allah forgiveth not (the sin of) joining other gods with Him; but He forgiveth whom He pleaseth other sins than this” (Sura 4:116). Muslims readily affirm the sinlessness of Christ, however, they adamantly deny His sacrifice upon the cross and subsequent resurrection. In doing so, they deny the singular historical fact that demonstrates that Jesus does not stand in a long line of peers from Abraham to Muhammad, but is God in human flesh. The Qur’anic phrase, “Allah raised him up” (Sura 4:158) is taken to mean that Jesus was supernaturally raptured rather than resurrected from the dead. In Islamic lore, God made someone look like Jesus, and this look-alike was crucified in His place. In recent years, the myth that Judas was crucified in place of Jesus has been popularized in Muslim circles due to the propagation of a late-medieval work titled The Gospel of Barnabas. Against the weight of historical evidence, the Qur’an exclaims, “they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them” (Sura 4:157).

Finally, in addition to rejecting the divinity of Jesus, Islam also renounces the divine identity of the Holy Spirit. Far from being the third person of the triune God who inspired the text of the Bible, Islam teaches that the Holy Spirit is the archangel Gabriel who dictated the Qur’an to Muhammad over a period of 23 years. This is ironic considering that Islam also identifies the Holy Spirit promised by Jesus in John 14 as Muhammad. The Bible, however, roundly rejects such corruptions and misrepresentations. The Holy Spirit is neither an angel nor a mere mortal; rather, He is the very God Who redeems us from our sins and will one day resurrect us to life eternal (e.g., Acts 5:3–4; Rom. 8:11).

For further study, see Timothy George, Is the Father of Jesus the God of Muhammad? (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002).

Minuteman Border Fence Project

(PHOENIX, AZ) April 20, 2006 – Chris Simcox, President of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, today announced plans by the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps (“MCDC”) to work with local Arizona land owners to build border security fencing on private land along the border with Mexico.

At present, six private land owners have partnered with the Minutemen for the commencement of construction of border fencing on their land. Surveillance cameras on the fencing will be monitored via computer by registered Minutemen across the country. Two construction companies to date have offered to inaugurate groundbreaking, coordinate volunteer construction crews and donate the use of the necessary heavy construction equipment.

Simcox says those involved in the planning hope to keep costs near $150 per foot.

Click here to donate Directly to Minuteman Border Fence
http://www.MinutemanBorderFence.com

The groundbreaking will begin in Arizona on Memorial Day weekend, unless in the interim President Bush deploys troops to immediately secure the out-of-control southern border.

The fencing will be built with privately donated funds, engineering and labor and will be used as an example to educate the public about the feasibility and efficacy of fencing to secure America’s borders from illegal incursion by aliens and international criminal cartels. A non-profit organization dedicated specifically to this purpose will facilitate and administer donations for construction of the fence. Monetary and in-kind contributions for this effort will go directly into building materials for this private, volunteer fencing project.

Simcox issued the following statement on the MCDC border fence project:

“President Bush once said he would not wait on events to act to protect our country. He has been president for over five years, and still he has not acted to secure our territorial frontier, even as his administration admits the United States government does not have operational control of our borders.

“On Memorial Day weekend, the American people will exercise their God-given rights to protect their lives and property by initiating construction of border fencing along the border on private land unless President Bush immediately deploys troops along the breadth of the Southwestern border line with Mexico, thereby retaking the region from the international criminal cartels who presently are in operational control of the border. The existing border crisis is a dereliction of duty by those entrusted with American security and sovereignty, leaving America vulnerable to terrorist infiltration and an unprecedented crime wave caused by drug smugglers, rapists, thieves, human traffickers and murderers who currently cross our border at will.

“President Bush and Congress have taxed the wages of the American people to pay for the protection of our country, and expended those dollars to subsidize millions of low-wage illegal workers with housing, education, medical care, and welfare benefits. Yet even the most basic level of national territorial integrity requires that our elected representatives secure the border. Should they continue to refuse to do their Constitutional duty, the Minutemen will again step into the breach and commence building the required border barriers on private land and with private donations.

“Should President Bush and Congress fail to fulfill their oaths of office, and meet their Constitutional obligation to protect these United States from invasion, we, the sovereign people of the United States, having suffered a long train of abuses at the hand of a willfully insolent government, do hereby declare that these States ought, should and will be protected by American Minutemen.”

Click here to donate Directly to Minuteman Border Fence
http://www.MinutemanBorderFence.com

Minutemen to Bush: Build Fence or We Will

By ARTHUR H. ROTSTEIN , 04.19.2006, 10:46 PM

Minuteman border watch leader Chris Simcox has a message for President Bush: Build new security fencing along the border with Mexico or private citizens will.

Simcox said Wednesday that he’s sending an ultimatum to the president, through the media, of course – “You can’t get through to the president any other way” – to deploy military reserves and the National Guard to the Arizona border by May 25.

Or, Simcox said, by the Memorial Day weekend Minuteman Civil Defense Corps volunteers and supporters will break ground to start erecting fencing privately.

“We have had landowners approach,” Simcox said in an interview. “We’ve been working on this idea for a while. We’re going to show the federal government how easy it is to build these security fences, how inexpensively they can be built when built by private people and free enterprise.”

Simcox said a half-dozen landowners along the Arizona-Mexico border have said they will allow fencing to be placed on their borderlands, and others in California, Texas and New Mexico have agreed to do so as well.

“Certainly, as with everything else, we’re only able to cover a small portion of the border,” Simcox said. “The state and federal government have bought up most of the land around the border. I suspect that’s why we’ll never get control of the border.”

But he said the plan is to put up secure fencing that truly will be an effective deterrent, and to show how easily it can be accomplished.

Simcox gave this description of the envisioned barrier-and-fencing complex:

Start with a 6-foot deep trench so a vehicle can’t crash through; behind it, roll of concertina (coiled, razor-edged barbed wire), in front of a 15-foot high heavy-gauge steel mesh fence angled outward at the top.

Behind the fence will be a 60- to 70-foot wide unpaved but graded dirt road, along with inexpensive, mounted video cameras that can be monitored from home computers. On the other side of the road will be a second, 15-foot fence, with more concertina wire on its outside.

“It’s a very simple, effective design based on feedback we’ve had from Border Patrol and the military,” Simcox said. “It’s a fence that can be built on the cheap, effective and secure.”

Simcox said supporters will try to build the fencing with volunteer labor. Surveyors and contractors have offered to help with the design and survey work, he said, and some have said they will provide heavy equipment.

Simcox said those involved in the planning hope to keep costs to between $125 and $150 a foot.

Access to land literally on the border is an issue because so much is state-leased trust property or federally owned, he said.

“You may have to deal with a situation where private property owners erect their own fences and may be faced with the president sending the National Guard to prevent them from protecting their private property,” Simcox said.

He said the Minuteman plan is “to keep turning up the heat” until President Bush has to respond somehow.