Brian Tashman's blog

Keyes: Gay Marriage Violates the Declaration of Independence

Alan Keyes isn’t done making anti-gay screeds, and this week writes in Renew America that LGBT equality is prohibited…by the Declaration of Independence.

He argues that according to the Declaration of Independence, America’s sovereignty relies on respecting God’s law, including the “rights of the God-endowed natural family.” Consequently, if the US doesn’t submit to divine authority, then the country will forfeit its sovereignty and be no more.

Keyes reasons that if the Supreme Court decides “to promote specious rights intended to supplant ‘the laws of nature and of nature’s God’ invoked in the Declaration of Independence” and “deny and disparage the natural rights of the God-endowed family” by approving of same-sex marriage, it would represent an “assault on the very root and source of our claim to decent liberty.”

Now, proponents of the Defense of Marriage law insist that the present occupant of the White House must simply "obey the law," even if he has reached the conclusion that it violates a constitutional right he is obliged by oath to respect. But their insistence violates the logic that substantiates the Constitution's constraining effect on the use of the U.S. government's powers. In the first instance, each branch has the duty to keep within the boundaries of the Constitution. The issue involved in Obama's refusal to defend DOMA is not, therefore, necessarily about his obligation to "obey the law." It is about whether or not, in this particular instance, his view that the law is unconstitutional is correct.



Because the elitist faction aims to overthrow constitutional government of, by, and for the people, they work to obscure or tacitly deny this fact. They want Americans to accept the notion that those who happen to wield the power of government at any given moment may decide, amongst themselves and without recourse to the people, what is constitutional and what is not. If and when the American people foolishly acquiesce in this oligarchic lie, they will thereby surrender their status as a free people.



As I recently pointed out, we learn the source and nature of these unenumerated rights from another "fundamental law" of the United States – the Declaration of Independence, which ascribes them to the Creator's endowment of all humanity. Most self-evident among them are the rights of the God-endowed natural family "rooted in obligations antecedent to any and all humanly instituted law or government." From this endowment, the people of the United States derive the sovereign authority to establish and maintain their self-government. Unless they are willing to subvert their own sovereignty, they are obliged, in their actions and decisions, to respect the source of authority that validates it.

In the weeks to come, the U.S. Supreme Court may decide to promote specious rights intended to supplant "the laws of nature and of nature's God" invoked in the Declaration of Independence. They may decide, in contravention of the Ninth Amendment, to deny and disparage the natural rights of the God-endowed family. It will then be for us, the people, to decide how to respond to their assault on the very root and source of our claim to decent liberty. If we respect the logic that reasonably, morally, and constitutionally justifies what their decision seeks to destroy, we will be able confidently to appeal, as America's founders did in the Declaration, "to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions." Then, whatever we face, we will have the courage to defend the institution that God made to be the living archetype of all the rest of our belongings.

Brian Brown: 'Ours Is Actually a Libertarian Argument' To Ban Gay Marriage

Like Rep. Louie Gohmert, Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage also participated in pastor Rick Scarborough’s Tea Party Unity conference calls back in March, where he made the “libertarian” argument against legalizing same-sex marriage.

Brown commended his anti-gay organization for having been able to “motivate a lot of the Tea Party groups” along with “African American and Hispanic folks” around their shared fear that gay marriage will undermine the Constitution and jeopardize “the future of Western civilization.”

After discussing how NOM is “working with leaders like Senator [Marco] Rubio or Ted Cruz,” he warned that marriage equality will grow the size and scope of government. If the state recognizes same-sex unions, Brown claimed, then public officials will “use the power of the state to punish, repress and marginalize” anti-gay activists.

He said that NOM’s opposition to marriage equality rests on the “libertarian argument” that if the state refuses to “recognize the truth that marriage is by its nature the union of a man and a woman” then “you’re giving the power to the state to call black white and white black, to put a falsehood into the law and a state that can do that is a state that pretty much can do anything.”

This is an issue where we can get new blood to support the Constitution, I mean that’s what’s at stake, Constitutionalism. When you have African American and Hispanic folks stepping up and saying that we will stand up for traditional marriage, we can make inroads there. I think the local Tea Party groups that have helped us with marches, helped us in any way they can, they’ve understood that this is about marriage, this is about the future of Western civilization, but this is also about our Constitution and whether judges can willy nilly create law out of thin air and I think that that has helped motivate a lot of the Tea Party groups.



We need leaders and we’re working with leaders like Senator [Marco] Rubio or Ted Cruz, or whoever they may be, who understand what’s at stake and will really lead the party and sort of counter some of these arguments. The second part of this is this false libertarian argument that somehow the state should just get out of marriage altogether. That is not going to happen. There is really one or two outcomes that’s going to happen in this: either we’re going to have the state embrace this new definition of marriage and use the power of the state to punish, repress and marginalize those of us that know that marriage is the union of a man and a woman, or we’re going to have the state recognize the truth about marriage.

Ours is actually a libertarian argument. We’re not arguing that the state create marriage, the state does not create marriage, but the state has to recognize the truth that marriage is by its nature the union of a man and a woman. When it abandons that truth, you’re giving the power to the state to call black white and white black, to put a falsehood into the law and a state that can do that is a state that pretty much can do anything.

Brown also fielded a question from notorious ant-gay activist Brian Camenker of MassResistance, who asked why NOM is not taking “a hard stance” against same-sex relationships and openly calling homosexuality “perverse” and “unnatural.”

Brown said that NOM tries to avoid making those arguments outright simply for tactical reasons as they are trying to sway Justice Anthony Kennedy and “it’s not likely that a stronger argument about homosexuality is really going to shift Kennedy.”

However, Brown said that other groups should continue “taking a harder line in focusing more on homosexuality.”

“Different groups need to do different things, not all groups have to do the same thing,” Brown explained. “So folks that are taking a harder line in focusing more on homosexuality, there need to be different groups doing different things.”

Camenker: It’s concerning to a lot of people that the arguments being used in the various court cases concede that homosexual relationships are legitimate and not a perversion or what have you, we just don’t like them, and we wonder if there was more of a hard stance that they are not legitimate, that it is perverse, unnatural and what have you, that we might have some better success in some of the cases.

The second part of the question is I understand that you’re at CPAC, what is it like being virtually the only pro-family, pro-marriage guy there? I’m very disturbed at the way CPAC is being run this year.

Brown: Whenever I’m asked about what I think about homosexuality, I’m very clear, I believe and as a Catholic I believe in the traditional teaching of our church. I think that sex is reserved for marriage, period. As far as the legal arguments go we may differ. I think a lot of the legal arguments have been made in the Prop 8 case especially have been made to speak to [Justice] Kennedy and Kennedy has already found in the Lawrence case, for example, that states can’t ban sodomy. So it’s not likely that a stronger argument about homosexuality is really going to shift Kennedy.

I know some people think we need to focus more on homosexuality. All I’ll say is that when asked I state what I believe and many of the religious supporters that we’ll have at the march clearly will stand up and proclaim biblical truth on marriage, but I’m not sure whether legally that is the best strategy. Also, different groups need to do different things, not all groups have to do the same thing. So folks that are taking a harder line in focusing more on homosexuality, there need to be different groups doing different things.

Don Feder Rails Against Immigrant 'Parasites' and Gay Marriage 'Travesty'

World Congress of Families spokesman Don Feder is out with a new column reminiscing about the good ole USA. He’s angry that Obama’s America has been “infiltrated by parasites, criminals, potential terrorists and the arrogantly unassimilable.”

Feder claims that Americans are facing a “cavalcade of degeneracy” and “toxic trash” in the form of “a steady stream of nudity, raw sexuality, bathroom humor, gut-wrenching violence and sadism,” while at the same time using gun control laws to “disarm the innocent, leaving them at the mercy of thugs and lunatics.”

He calls same-sex marriage an “absurdity” and “tragedy” that is bent on “deconstructing an institution on which civilization depends,” which he claims is the outcome of “rising tide of secularism, rapidly turning away from the God in whose name we were founded.”

“Still, the man who occupies the White House, the way Germany occupied France during World War II, is a symptom, not the disease,” Feder concluded. “As a conservative congressman recently remarked: ‘I think we can survive another four years of this guy. I’m not sure we can survive another four years of a country that would reelect this guy.’”

While politicians dress up amnesties as a “pathway to citizenship,” the nation is infiltrated by parasites, criminals, potential terrorists and the arrogantly unassimliable – and there’s not a damn thing we can do about it. Washington, the courts and media multiculturalists tell us that attempts to stem the flow are hateful, bigoted and futile.

We’re a nation whose entertainment industry is a cavalcade of degeneracy – a steady stream of nudity, raw sexuality, bathroom humor, gut-wrenching violence and sadism. Instead of manufactured products, this toxic trash is now one of our principal exports.

We are a nation with leaders whose answer to rampaging psychopaths is to disarm the innocent, leaving them at the mercy of thugs and lunatics, while congratulating themselves on their courage in standing up to the mythical gun lobby, as they travel about with armed guards and live in gated communities.

We are a nation of serfs whose laws are written by geriatric ideologues in black gowns who have made a mockery of democracy and turned the Constitution into an excuse for tyranny and bizarre social experiments.

We’re a nation which betrays its historic friends while slobbering over its foes, whose response to the cold-blooded murder of 3,000 Americans was a decade-long orgy of tolerance and understanding for the death cult that animated the murderers, dubbed the “religion of peace.”

We’re a country where a plurality now favors “solemnizing” an absurdity and calling the travesty “marriage” – an unparalleled corruption of language that is deconstructing an institution on which civilization depends.

We are a republic riding a rising tide of secularism, rapidly turning away from the God in whose name we were founded.



America 2013 is epitomized by Barack Hussein Obama, a man who so despises this nation and every thing it stands for that he can’t even bring himself to say that there’s anything objectively special about the country he leads (American “exceptionalism”), who showed his contempt for Middle America right at the start, when he characterized small towns as the haunts of religious zealots, gun nuts and bigots – a president who’s determined to govern without Congress and outside the Constitution, who’s committed to expanding government as rapidly as possible – for whom “revenue-enhancement” is a religion and mega-deficits are a ritual.

Still, the man who occupies the White House, the way Germany occupied France during World War II, is a symptom, not the disease. As a conservative congressman recently remarked: “I think we can survive another four years of this guy. I’m not sure we can survive another four years of a country that would reelect this guy.”

Robertson: Chronic Illnesses Probably 'Psychosomatic' and the Result of Negative Thinking

In response to a question from a 700 Club viewer who wonders if his unnamed chronic illness is part of “‘the plan’ God has for my life,” Pat Robertson explained that the viewer was really to blame because of his negativity

Based solely on the short question, Robertson told the viewer that “many of the problems that you have come about from your attitude, your own reaction to things, your own abilities, your own work.”

“Chronic illness can often come about from psychosomatic problems, I don’t want to make a broad statement,” Robertson continued, “It just sounds like that you’ve got a negative attitude.”

Robertson finished with a Word-Faith teaching about how the viewer can simply speak happiness and health, rather than negativity, into existence: “You literally can speak into the world around you and the results begin to change and if you speak negatively you will have negative, so don’t say it’s ‘God’s plan’ I think that’s a misnomer.”

Watch:

Bauer: Ben Carson Facing a 'Leftist Lynching'

Yesterday, Gary Bauer told members of his organization the Campaign for Working Families that conservative activist Ben Carson is the victim of a “leftist lynching.”

Bauer said that “the left-wing coalition of socialists and radical secularists” and its “political killing machine” have targeted Carson just as they have attacked “Clarence Thomas, Allen West and other people of color who have defended conservatism.”

He especially took issue with criticism of Carson’s comparison of homosexuality to pedophilia and bestiality, warning that the campaign for marriage equality is “a battering ram to destroy your religious liberty and freedom of speech.”

The Leftist "Lynching" Of Ben Carson Begins

Dr. Ben Carson burst onto the scene after his bold speech at the National Prayer Breakfast in February. His remarks were a breath of fresh air for millions of Americans who want to take the country back from the left-wing coalition of socialists and radical secularists. I have known about Dr. Carson for years, and I agree that he seems to have the character many would like to see in our leaders. BUT. . .

It is a vain hope to think that simply having a good heart and a remarkable story of success and achievement will somehow inoculate that individual from the political killing machine that the left has developed in recent years.



MSNBC's Toure Neblett recently said that Dr. Carson is nothing more than the conservative movement's "new black friend" who is "helpful in assuaging their guilt." He also said that Dr. Carson, a neurosurgeon, is "unserious." This is what the left has done to Clarence Thomas, Allen West and other people of color who have defended conservatism.

Now comes the latest attack against Dr. Carson. The left is creating a narrative that he is a bigot. Asked on Sean Hannity's show what he thought about the marriage debate, Dr. Carson responded:

"Well, my thoughts are that marriage is between a man and a woman. It's a well-established, fundamental pillar of society, and no group -- be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality, it doesn't matter what they are -- they don't get to change the definition."

Dr. Carson was immediately excoriated for his remarks, and he quickly apologized if he offended anyone. (Note to Dr. Carson: Don't run for president if you are going to start apologizing for offending liberals. They are offended by your very existence.)

Now students at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine have launched a petition to prevent Dr. Carson from speaking at this year's commencement ceremony because his values are "deeply offensive to a large proportion our student body." (Note to pastors and young Christians: The same-sex marriage debate is not about "fairness for everyone." Wake up! This is a battering ram to destroy your religious liberty and freedom of speech.)



In contrast, liberals see a black conservative doctor with a wonderful personality and incredible achievements and no matter how popular he is, their first instinct is to take him down. That is what the radical left has done to our politics. They have turned it into a "blood sport," and right now it is Dr. Ben Carson being sliced up.

Pratt: 'Angry Liberals Should Not Have Guns'

Larry Pratt, the extremist and conspiratorial leader of Gun Owners of America, last week gave a speech to We the People Tea Party of Northwest Louisiana where he mused that liberals should not be allowed to own guns.

After saying that President Obama held a shotgun “girly like” while skeet shooting, the Shreveport Times reports that Pratt told the group that Democrats like Obama “almost got me convinced to modify my purist Second Amendment position: there are people that shouldn’t have guns, angry liberals should not have guns.”

Watch:

Keyes: Marriage Equality is the 'Archetype of all Crimes Against Humanity'

Alan Keyes once again appeared on Stan Solomon’s talk show, this time to discuss their stringent opposition to marriage equality.

After host, Steve Davis, claimed that just because they “oppose homosexual marriage or homosexual adoptions, it doesn’t mean that we’re homophobes,” Solomon insisted that he is indeed a homophobe.

“Speak for yourself,” Solomon said, “I can’t stand the thought, the idea, the concept of homosexuality.”

“I don’t think I’m showing love for anyone if I encourage them or enable them or stand silently while they do something that’s going to kill them; the average homosexual lives half the adult life of the average heterosexual, fact,” Solomon maintained, as he went on to comparing homosexuality to drug abuse, drunk driving and swimming with sharks.

Keyes, who kicked his daughter out of his house after she came out of the closet, agreed with Solomon’s anti-gay statements.

Later, Keyes attacked Sen. Rob Portman’s for endorsing marriage equality after learning that his son is gay: “If you go down a road that satisfies your personal predilections and relationships and sacrifices the common good of the country, including the elementary institution by which civilization is sustained, then you’re not only derelict in your public duty, you are abandoning your obligation as a human being.”

“Frankly, people throw around words like ‘crime against humanity,’ I think that kind of disregard for the God-endowed natural rights of human being is the archetype of all crimes against humanity,” Keyes concluded, “and I think we have an entire elite faction that is now committed to committing such a crime against the American people.”

Watch:

Ex-Gay Activist to Starbucks: Prepare for Divine Punishment

Religious Right groups have been promoting a boycott against Starbucks ever since the company announced its support for a marriage equality law in its home state of Washington. Now an ex-gay activist is warning the company to prepare for a divine reckoning after Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz rebuffed the head of the Corporate Morality Action Center, which opposes gay rights.

In an interview with the Chrisitan News Network, ex-gay preacher Robert Breaud, who is best known for his hit song “It’s Not OK To Be Gay,” said that Schultz has taken a “Christ-hating position” and is “helping to destroy young people’s lives.”

“God will not bless your business in the long run if you consistently thumb your nose at Him and support things He calls sinful,” Breaud said. An ex-homosexual who now serves as an evangelist states that he has decided to join the boycott against the coffee king Starbucks following recent remarks made by CEO Howard Schultz regarding the company’s support of homosexual “marriage.”

“It’s an unGodly, Christ-hating position,” he said of Schultz’s comments. Robert Breaud of Wisconsin told Christian News Network that he had been involved in the homosexual lifestyle until his 30′s, but has served Christ now for nearly 20 years.

“I basically got my fill of the emptiness of sin,” he said. “I was never happy, never filled, never satisfied with male-to-male relationships.”



He said that if he could sit down with Schultz, he would urge him to do what is right.

“[I would tell him,] if you want God to bless your business, run it in accordance with His law … with His revealed will in Scripture,” Breaud stated. “You’re promoting sin. You’re helping to destroy young people’s lives. … God will not bless your business in the long run if you consistently thumb your nose at Him and support things He calls sinful.”

Breaud urged others to join the boycott as well.

“There’s really no good reason not to join the boycott,” he said. “There’s only excuses.”

“Who do you love more, Christ or your coffee?”

Deace on O'Reilly's Marriage Remarks: 'That Is a Hanging Offense'

Conservative talk show host Steve Deace is not happy with Bill O’Reilly’s seeming reversal on marriage equality, telling Religious Right activist Bob Vander Plaats that O’Reilly is “betraying” his own viewers and is essentially a “charlatan” and a “fraud.”

While discussing the Supreme Court’s handling of the marriage cases with Vander Plaats, who warned that the court could “set off a constitutional crisis,” Deace said that O’Reilly is a traitor to his conservative base: “you stab them in the back, throw them under the bus and use the enemy’s own language against them. To me that’s a hanging offense; that is a hanging offense.”

Vander Plaats: If you usurp the will of the people—we saw it in Iowa, you usurp the will of the people, three justices get removed, there’s a credibility gap with the three justices that continue to serve— if you usurp the vote of the people of California you will set off a constitutional crisis against these United States and it should be a constitutional crisis. People like you and me and others, we’d help do our part to set off a constitutional crisis if that is in fact what they came back with.

Deace: I’ve got a bee in my bonnet big time and it’s Bill O’Reilly at Fox News. I don’t like charlatans, I don’t like frauds; give me Rachel Maddow, at least she’s honest. But when you are trying to profit off of the very people you are betraying and you have tried to condescend them and patronize them for years and then at the moment they probably need you to return the favor of all the money they made you over the last fifteen years the most, you stab them in the back, throw them under the bus and use the enemy’s own language against them. To me that’s a hanging offense; that is a hanging offense.

Deace said there are no good arguments for same-sex marriage, and gay rights activists are just throwing “a hissy-fit.” He even said it is pointless to note that homosexuality is found in other species besides humans since “there’s also the licking of one’s own genitals, the flinging of one’s own feces and the eating of live prey and then puking it up to feed your offspring in nature too.”   

With this issue there are no good arguments for it because the argument essentially boils down to, ‘because I want it.’ It’s essentially a tantrum; it’s policy by desire. ‘Because I want it.’ It’s a child throwing a hissy-fit, tantrum in Wal-Mart because mom bought me the regular sized M&Ms and not the king-sized that I demanded. As Ryan T. Anderson of the Heritage Foundation pointed out on CNN this week that just drove the reporter into a meltdown, ‘no one is in jail for having consensual homosexual sex with another adult, what you’re trying to do is impose your narrow definition of what this means and therefore what it means for free speech and religious liberty on everybody else.’ So they throw out all these clichés and they are so easy to debunk. One of my favorites is, ‘well there’s homosexuality in nature.’ There’s also the licking of one’s own genitals, the flinging of one’s own feces and the eating of live prey and then puking it up to feed your offspring in nature too.

Gainor: Marriage Equality Advocates Will 'Undermine Our Entire Country and Everything That Made Us Free'

Media Research Center spokesman Dain Gainor, who last week argued that the media is engaging in “full-blown fascist propaganda” tactics to promote marriage equality, in a recent interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network maintained that gay rights advocates have America and freedom in their crosshairs.

After host Efrem Graham said that “now it’s Christians who stand up to traditional marriage who are actually the ones being discriminated against,” Gainor readily agreed: “That’s absolutely true and this is just the beginning.”

Gainor asserted that the left will move to promote polygamy as “the advocacy words they use for gay marriage, you could easily just replace just that and use it as advocacy for polygamy or who knows what.”

“The left wants a no holds barred, nothing is wrong morality,” Gainor asserted, “that is going to undermine our entire country and everything that made us free.”

Watch:

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious