Tory Roberts's blog

Live Action Rally: Abortion Providers Just as Bad as the Taliban

Anti-choice activists gathered in front of ABC studios in Washington, D.C. today to draw attention to what they say is the “real” war on women.

The March on the Media rally claimed to be exposing the media’s supposed censorship of the realities of abortion and the lionization of pro-choice advocates like Wendy Davis. The rally was organized by Lila Rose, the president of Live Action, who previously equated the anti-choice movement with the abolitionist movement and the Revolutionary War.

Rose wasn’t alone in her questionable historical comparisons. Jill Stanek, an anti-choice activist who previously accused Obama of supporting infanticide while a member of the Illinois Senate, stole the show today by comparing abortion to the brutality of the Vietnam War, the Oklahoma City bombing, and the atrocities committed by the Taliban.

FRC Fellow: Allowing Women in Combat ‘Tragic,’ ‘Immoral,’ and ‘Un-American’

On her radio show this week, Janet Parshall spoke with Robert L. Maginnis, a retired Army lieutenant colonel and the current senior fellow for national security at the Family Research Council, about the Pentagon’s recent decision to lift the ban on women serving in combat units.

Maginnis, who recently wrote a book on the topic, said that allowing women into combat goes against science. He called the situation “tragic,” “unnecessary,” “immoral,” and “un-American.”
 

Maginnis: I’m concerned about the direction of my country. I see this as a tragic mistake that’s going to weaken our fighting forces, compromise the battle proven standards that we’ve shed a lot of blood over the last couple centuries for. And also it’s unnecessary risk for the people that ultimately are pushed into this environment. And finally I think it’s immoral and I think it’s un-American what these people want to do. And yet, I see- the subtitle I think is very fair- I see cowardice on the Capitol Hill. Because our Founders were wise people. They said we want the Congress to set the rules and regulations for the armed forces. And guess what, they haven’t had a hearing in 34 years in the House armed services and they haven’t had one in 23 years in the Senate. They’ve relegated, they’ve abandoned the responsibility that the founders intended them to have and they’ve pushed it into the administration. And the administration, you know, they’re going to do what’s politically expedient. And that just hurts my heart. Cause I know the environment that we’re going to push these young people into, I know how vicious it is. And it just doesn’t fit with the science and common sense, much less the interests of our country.

Parshall, for her part, blamed the decision on the “radical feminist movement,” claiming the policy change would not only “push women” into a situation that they don’t want to be in, it flies in the face of God and what is “natural.”

“I thought men were made by God to defend women,” Parshall lamented. “It was just a natural.”
 

Parshall: So it begs the question- and I'm asking it, but at some level it's rhetorical- and that is, why we got here? But Bobby you and I have been in Washington. We watched the radical feminist movement. We saw the residuals of all of that, so this is just a tendril outreach it seems to me. But it goes deeper than just ardent feminism. It violates a core principle. And I’m going to say something terribly politically incorrect. I thought men were made by God to defend women. It was just a natural. And to push women into combat, front line combat- and you draw a distinction by the way between high intensity combat and high intensity police work which I love and I want you to explain in a minute. It seems to me to violate the very core at some level of how God designed us. Is that an overreaction on my part?

Maginnis: Not at all, Janet. Men are hard wired to protect women.

Steven Emerson: Blame Tolerance for the Fort Hood Attacks

American Family Radio host Sandy Rios spoke yesterday with Islamic extremism “expert” Steve Emerson about the ongoing trial of Nidal Hasan, the army major accused of killing 13 people and wounding more than 30 in a killing spree at Fort Hood back in 2009.

Rios and Emerson agreed that the killing was a result of the “deterrent effects” of tolerance and that if it weren’t for fear of being called a “racist,” and “Islamaphobe,” Hasan would have been reported to the FBI long ago.

Emerson took it one step further, saying that those who fight Islamophobia are “as much culpable as those pulling the trigger.”

Emerson: And there’s also going to be playing, maybe later today or tomorrow, a videotape of Hasan giving a presentation at Walter Reed where he openly and unambiguously calls for the killing of infidels. And not one person in that 200 person room listening ever reported him to the FBI.

Rios: That’s shocking.

Emerson: It is shocking. And you know what Sandy? It’s because of the fear that they would be called Islamaphobes. This is where this whole notion of the radical Islamic groups calling anybody who criticizes radical Islam as a racist has had a deterrent effect in reporting potential terrorist attacks and they are as much culpable as the people pulling the trigger.

Rios: Absolutely. And I want to say that this is across the board with our intelligence agencies. Their hands have been so restricted, their training manuals stripped of what’s really true. And they really are afraid to report even suspicious behavior. And that’s why we are probably, no doubt, more at risk now than we ever were before 9/11.

'Ex-Gay' Activist: 'Hip Hip Hurray for Ex-Gays!'

Speaking at today’s Ex-Gay Pride rally in front of the Supreme Court, Chuck Peters condemned gay rights advocates for being “heterophobic,” “bigoted,” and “anti-pro-choice.” Peters is a research assistant with Christopher Doyle’s Voice of the Voiceless, a group that describes itself as “the only anti-defamation league for former homosexuals.”

“We are ex-queers and we’re not going anywhere so get used to us!” Peters exclaimed. He then went on to create his own cheer for the ex-gay movement.

“Hip hip hurray for ex-gays. Hip hip hurray for ex-gays. Hip hip hurray for ex-gays.”

Watch:

The Ten Best Signs and Outfits from the 'DC March for Jobs'

Hundreds of anti-immigrant activists marched from Freedom Plaza to the Capitol yesterday as part of the “DC March for Jobs.” The rally, sponsored by the Black American Leadership Alliance (BALA), was organized as a protest against immigration reform legislation.

Below are images of some of the most expressive signs and the best dressed demonstrators from the rally.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Texas State Senator Compares Himself to Jesus, Condemns 'Anarchy' of Pro-Choice 'Mob'

Texas Republican state senator Dan Patrick is not impressed by Wendy Davis. Despite Davis’ all day filibuster of an anti-choice bill, Patrick thinks he is the one that deserves the praise. Patrick, the sponsor of the bill, told Mike Huckabee today that he urged his fellow Republicans to break Senate tradition and stop the filibuster.

He compared his action to Jesus’ criticism of the Pharisees for placing too much importance on “laws and rules.” Patrick went on to encourage other senators to similarly cast off the law, asking, “Are we going to become the modern day Pharisees as Republicans of the Senate?”

Patrick also criticized the crowd that turned out to support Davis, calling it an “organized mob” carrying out an attack on the government. He blamed their behavior on the fact that they were Democrats, because “a tea party would never do this.”

Jennifer Roback Morse: Hollywood to Blame for Gay Marriage Decisions

Jennifer Roback Morse of the National Organization for Marriage knows who to blame for yesterday’s marriage equality victories in the Supreme Court: Hollywood. Roback Morse, the campaign spokesperson for Proposition 8 in California, discussed the marriage equality decisions on today’s Sandy Rios in the Morning. She blamed Hollywood for the Supreme Court’s decisions on Prop 8 and DOMA, saying that Hollywood is “dominated by all aspects of the sexual revolution.”

Morse also blamed television for American’s “distorted view” of how many gay people there are in the country. “They’re only about 2% of the population,” she claimed. “But if you watch TV all day, you’ll think it’s 30 or 40% of the population’s gay.”

Morse urged anti-gay activists “to go down fighting” and suggested that the freedom of speech is at stake: “You need to speak out while you still can because these guys are closing in on us in all kinds of dimensions.” According to Morse, gay rights advocates believe “the sexual revolution is the highest objective and will bend the rule of law and bend the Constitution” in order to realize their goals.

Rep. John Fleming: Overturning DOMA Would Lead to Sham Marriages

On the Family Research Council’s Washington Watch last night, Rep. John Fleming (R.-LA) weighed in on the pending Supreme Court decisions on marriage equality. Fleming likened gay marriage to marriage between a U.S. citizen and a foreigner, claiming that federal recognition of gay marriage would cause straight people to enter into same-sex marriages for practical benefits. Same-sex marriages would then have to be questioned to determine if they were “done for convenience” or as the result of a bribe. Host Tony Perkins added that gay marriage would never be legitimate, because there is no way to “verify” the validity of the couple.

Fleming: But you know, it’s interesting. Humans can be very innovative sometimes and I can actually see where two people of the same sex, even who are not themselves homosexual in any way, could find a way to get married just for the purpose of sharing those benefits and only for practical reasons. So you can see the ramifications if the Supreme Court comes out and allows that.

Perkins: No question about it. And there’s no way to necessarily verify that. What you can then set up is a case where you discriminate against couples who are in some jurisdictions, because if they move their marriage is not recognized. And they could then be treated in a way that’s different than heterosexual couples that are cohabitating. It’s a mess once you go down this path.

Fleming: It is. It would be similar to marrying someone from a foreign country. Is it done for convenience? Did someone pay somebody to be married? I mean you can see how the whole institution of marriage could be demeaned. It could certainly be reduced in its importance and taken off the lofty place that we now hold marriage.

Fleming also said that fathers are being “marginalized” as a result of the decline of the traditional family. He stated that “fathers have a less and less important role in procreation now,” although the biology behind that last point was a little unclear.

Perkins: There’s really an alarming rate of fatherlessness in America. And we’re beginning to see the consequences of that as we’ve moved away from that normative definition of what marriage and family has been and should be.

Fleming: No question, Tony. The long term trend over the last three decades is to marginalize fathers. Fathers have a less and less important role in procreation now, in rearing children, in providing for families. Even in many cases, even when they’re actually in the marriage and they exist as a father, oftentimes being marginalized in their importance there. So it’s an alarming cultural direction.

Rep. Trent Franks Pushes Abortion Bill, Questions Legitimacy of Medical Opponents

In an interview with Family Research Council president Tony Perkins yesterday, Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) once again expressed confidence that his bill banning abortion after twenty weeks will pass the House. The bill, known as the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, is set to come to the floor today.

Franks framed the bill as a heroic attempt to protect mothers and children from “heartless monsters” like convicted abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell. While Gosnell was a criminal outlier, anti-choice activists have seized on his case to undermine reproductive rights. In an Akin-esque clarification, Franks stated “the medical community – that is, the legitimate medical community,” says that unborn children are able to feel pain twenty weeks. Franks’ source of “legitimate” medical knowledge appears to be a single 2007 paper that used rats as test subjects. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists actually opposes the bill, as well as the validity of the twenty-week pain threshold.

Franks: The Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act is very truly and simply a deeply sincere effort to protect both mothers and their pain-capable unborn babies entering their sixth month of gestation from these heartless monsters like Kermit Gosnell. That’s the simplest way I know to put it.

Perkins: And Congressman there’s a reason behind this where you have chosen this mark of twenty weeks. This is not just arbitrary but this is based on the testimony of medical and scientific experts that have talked about what takes place at this twentieth week of pregnancy.

Franks: Tony, that’s right. You know, the overwhelming consensus in the medical community, that is, the legitimate medical community, says that these unborn children feel pain at the end of the fifth month or earlier. And the real question here- this is the bottom line. The real question is not whether these unborn children entering their sixth month of gestation are capable of feeling pain. The real question is are we. That’s the big one.

FRC: Plan B Access Will Encourage Youth STDs, Date Rape, and Sexual Predation

The Obama administration announced Monday that it would drop its fight to maintain age restrictions on the sale of emergency contraceptives. The Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins and Anna Higgins of FRC’s Center for Human Dignity responded on yesterday’s Washington Watch by outlining the supposed consequences this decision will have on young girls.

Perkins lamented that “inappropriate sexual behavior,” such as “date rape” and relations between adults and minors, “can easily be dealt with” now that the pill is available to minors without parental consent, while Higgins warned that the pill will now “be available to people who are preying on young girls,” despite the fact that allowing minors to purchase Plan B has no relation to its availability to adult predators.

Higgins: This over the counter access is really- another health concern is it’s going to be distancing girls who are at high risk for contracting sexually transmitted diseases or being sexually abused from accessing medical care or from talking to their parents about these issues.

Perkins: Let me zero in, Anna- Anna Higgins is my guest, you’re listening to Washington Watch, I’m your host Tony Perkins. We’re talking about a decision that came from the Obama administration last night to drop their appeal of a judge’s ruling out of New York that would require over-the-counter sale of Plan B, the one-pill version that’s sold by Teva. The issue of sexual exploitation, now that this drug is available over the counter, it’s easy if there is a case of inappropriate sexual behavior, whether it’s a date rape or something else, it can be, or an adult that’s having relations with a minor, that can easily be dealt with without any participation of a parent or other medical experts or guidance provided that could protect that child in the long run.

Higgins: Yeah that’s a grave concern that’s being glossed over by the proponents of this decision. You know they’re really not addressing this. It’s a very serious concern. Because what we have here is a way for this kind of emergency contraceptive or Plan B to be available to people who are preying on young girls and these young girls are avoiding their first line of defense which is parents and doctors, you know, and protecting them against people who would prey on them. So you know this is available like you said to any age, there’s no age limit now, so you know these young girls could be potentially eleven, twelve years old and the idea that they’re being preyed upon by sexual predators is a very real possibility.
Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious