C3

Get Ready For ReaganBook: The 'Facebook For Patriots'

Last weekend, the Ohio Liberty Coalition hosted a "Reload 4 Liberty" event at which Janet Porter spoke about her never-ending push to get her anti-choice "Heartbeat Bill" legislation passed in Ohio. But apparently that is not all that Porter is up to these days, as she also revealed to the audience that she'll soon be unveiling something called ReaganBook, which aims to become "the Facebook for patriots."

Because Facebook is run by the sorts of people who march in gay pride parades and supposedly censors messages from anti-gay activists like Peter LaBarbera, Porter explained that she decided to launch ReaganBook as a conservative alternative.

"We're tearing down walls, get it?" she said. "We're tearing down walls of tyranny, or censorship":

And indeed, ReaganBook is an actual thing ... and though, as of this posting, it currently only has thirty-one members, including Janet Porter, we are sure that once it is officially announced, it'll sweep the nation!

Appeals Court Strikes Down Marriage Ban in Virginia, Ruling Will Also Affect Carolinas and West Virginia

Today the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down Virginia’s ban on marriage for same-sex couples.

This is a historic step forward for equality in the South. Beyond Virginia, the ruling will also affect the other states covered by the 4th Circuit, including North Carolina, South Carolina, and West Virginia, which have similar bans in place. In West Virginia, the district judge considering the challenge to the state’s ban said last month that he would not proceed until the federal appeals court had ruled.

In the majority opinion, the judges noted that bigotry and fear cannot be the basis for the denial of equal rights under the law:

We recognize that same-sex marriage makes some people deeply uncomfortable. However, inertia and apprehension are not legitimate bases for denying same-sex couples due process and equal protection of the laws.

…The choice of whether and whom to marry is an intensely personal decision that alters the course of an individual's life. Denying same-sex couples this choice prohibits them from participating fully in our society, which is precisely the type of segregation that the Fourteenth Amendment cannot countenance.

For those who claim that marriage bans are legitimate because they were adopted by popular vote, the court quoted a Supreme Court case from 1964:

A citizen’s constitutional rights can hardly be infringed simply because a majority of the people choose that it be.

That one sentence perfectly encapsulates why courts matter.
 

PFAW Foundation

Bryan Fischer Cites Mysterious Red River In China As Proof That Everything The Bible Says Is Literally True

On his radio broadcast today, Bryan Fischer seized upon a story about a river in eastern China that mysteriously turned dark red over the weekend, pointing to it as evidence that the Bible can always be trusted since this is exactly what happened in the Book of Exodus.

Saying that this situation is "exactly what you read in the Old Testament account," Fischer proclaimed that "if this could happen, a large river could mysteriously, instantaneously turn blood red in 2014, it could also happen in 1446 B.C."

"Do not abandon your belief in trustworthiness of the Word of God," he concluded.

There is one small difference, of course, since in the story in Exodus the river was turned literally into blood and was not the result of someone illegally dumping dye or chemicals into the river, which is what is suspected of having happened in China.

Glenn Beck Says Obama Wants Impeachment Threats Because It Will Help Pass Immigration Reform

On his radio program today, Glenn Beck argued that nobody in the GOP is seriously calling for President Obama's impeachment, but Democrats and the media keep talking about it because doing so will help Obama pass immigration reform.

Saying that there is not one person within the Republican Party that is seriously considering impeaching Obama (despite the fact that he totally deserves it), nor even seriously making the case, Beck said that the issue keeps being brought up nonetheless, linking it to the immigration debate by warning that progressives are winning the fight over immigration reform by framing it in terms of "justice" rather than "freedom. "

Conservatives are going to lose the P.R battle, he warned, because "the president is going to change the subject and he's going to make it about impeachment."

"So who wants it?" Beck asked, rhetorically. "The president does, because then he'll be able to say 'I demand justice.'"

Impeachment, Beck explained, is just like the birther and race issues in that they were also ginned up by Democrats and the media, not conservatives and Republicans, in order to help Obama.

"The birther thing is over, the black thing is over," he said, "so now he needs to be able to call for justice" by using the threat of impeachment to promote his political agenda:

People For the American Way Foundation Congratulates Rabbi David Saperstein On Nomination to Be Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom

WASHINGTON — People For the American Way Foundation today congratulated board member Rabbi David Saperstein on his nomination by President Obama to be Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom.

Rabbi Saperstein will step down from the board of directors of People For the American Way Foundation upon confirmation to the position.

People For the American Way Foundation President Michael Keegan said:

“I am thrilled that Rabbi Saperstein has been nominated to join the State Department as Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom. His warm, thoughtful, serious approach to issues of religious freedom at home and abroad make him the perfect choice for this role. At a time when people across the globe are facing serious threats to their religious liberty, there is no better person to lead the United States’ efforts in this area.

“At the same time, Rabbi Saperstein will be sorely missed on the board of People For the American Way Foundation. We have been fortunate to benefit over the last 28 years from his wise counsel, thoughtful analysis, and boundless energy. All of us at PFAW Foundation wish him well in his new endeavor and look forward to working with him in this new role.”

###

Mat Staver Warns That God Will Soon Destroy America, Just Like Pompeii And Sodom And Gomorrah

Liberty Counsel chairman Mat Staver recently took a cruise with his wife during which they visited the ancient city of Pompeii, which was destroyed by the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in 79 C.E. and it made him realize that America is likewise on the verge of total destruction if it does not stop legal abortion and gay marriage.

"I think we're living in the shade of Vesuvius," Staver said on a recent episode of Liberty Counsel's "Faith and Freedom" radio program, warning that Americans are going about their daily lives, removing God from our society, and engaging in sexual immorality, completely unaware that this nation will soon be completely wiped out if we do not change our ways.

When co-host Matt Barber compared the destruction of Pompeii to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah in the Bible, Staver completely agreed, saying that just as Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for engaging in homosexuality, "in Pompeii, they were doing the same kind of thing ... it was a sexually immoral society."

And the same thing will soon happen to America, Staver warned.

"I think that's where we are today with some of the threats to life and family and religious freedom in America," he said. "We can't just continue to go on and slaughter one child every twenty seconds, fifty five million since 1973, and expect that there's not going to be consequences. We can't go on and redefine marriage and family and not expect any consequences. We can't to on and pretend that God doesn't exist without expecting consequences":

Gordon Klingenschmitt Scores An Exclusive Interview With Sen. Mike Lee

The Western Conservative Summit was held in Denver earlier this month and Gordon Klingenschmitt, the demon-obsessed anti-gay exorcist who is the GOP nominee for a seat in the Colorado legislature, was on hand to get his photo taken and score exclusive interviews with some of the speakers, including Sen. Mike Lee of Utah.

Klingenschmitt asked Lee about the effort by Democrats in the Senate to reverse the Supreme Court's Hobby Lobby decision and though the effort failed, Lee warned it "was nothing short of a full-frontal attack on religious liberty itself."

"This is not about women's health," Lee told Klingenschmitt, "as much as they would like to try and dress it up that way. This is about religious freedom and this is an all-out, no-holds-barred attack on that and it's one that we have to resist":

The Doctor Is In: Dinesh D'Souza Psychoanalyzes The Left

Dinesh D'Souza spent an hour on Glenn Beck's radio program today promoting his new book and film "America: Imagine the World Without Her" while psychoanalyzing the Left by explaining that President Obama and the entire movement are motivated by nothing more than envy and a desire to destroy everyone who is better off.

"The primary emotion that drives the Left is the emotion of envy," D'Souza said, asserting that politicians like Obama succeed by convincing people that instead of bettering their own situations through education or hard work, the government will simply pull down those who have already succeeded and then redistribute some of that wealth to them.

"So here's the envious guy, seething with envy, seething with resentment and who should come to him at this point but Obama," he explained. "And Obama, himself suffused with envy, will say to this guy 'Listen, let me tell you something, you're not envious, you are righteously indignant, you know why? Because look at those guys in that restaurant, they've been stealing from you. Society creates wealth and then greedy entrepreneurs come in and grab it. So here's what you do: you vote for me, I will take the cops and go get their stuff and then I will give some of it to you.'"

"You have here a dirty bargain by people who are appealing to the lowest impulses in human nature," D'Souza said, "and it's camouflaged under the banner of social justice. It's ultimately the biggest scam of them all":

Mat Staver Calls For Obama's Impeachment Over Anti-Discrimination Executive Order

On today's "Faith and Freedom" radio broadcast, Liberty Counsel chairman Mat Staver called for President Obama to be impeached for having recently signed an executive order banning companies that receive federal contracts from discriminating against employees based on sexual orientation and gender identity, saying that Obama is a dictator who thinks that he is above the law.

"He is literally taking upon himself powers that are not conferred to the president of the United States," Staver declared. "The president can't, through executive order, just bypass Congress and that's what he's doing. This is reprehensible. This is a dictatorship. This is a fiefdom that he is doing and he needs to be stopped. He needs to literally be impeached ... He just simply thinks he is a king and the Constitution is a pesky document. This is a man that needs to be impeached. He does not deserve to be the president of the United States of America":

What Hobby Lobby Shows Us About the Supreme Court and Civil Rights Laws: Winners and Losers in the Roberts Court

This post was originally published at the Huffington Post.

In its recent decision in Hobby Lobby, the conservative 5-4 majority -- Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Alito, Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy -- did something that may appear very unusual. In divided cases, these five justices have the reputation for interpreting very narrowly laws passed by Congress to protect civil rights. So why did they interpret so broadly the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), a law passed by Congress to protect the important civil right of religious freedom? The answer, unfortunately, is all too clear. Comparing Hobby Lobby with the two rulings in civil rights law cases issued by the Court over the last year, the key factor that explains how the conservative majority ruled is not precedent, the language of the statute, or congressional intent, but who wins and who loses.

Let's start with last year's rulings, both of which concerned Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act which bans employment discrimination. In University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, the majority ruled very narrowly in interpreting Title VII, deciding that the only way that employees can prevail on a claim that they have been fired in retaliation for raising job bias claims is to prove that they would not have been discharged "but for" the retaliatory motive. This was despite the fact that in order to strengthen Title VII, Congress added language to the law in 1991 to make clear that plaintiffs should prevail if they show that discrimination was a "motivating factor" in a job decision. As Justice Ginsburg explained in dissecting Justice Alito's attempt for the majority to draw a distinction between retaliation and other claims under Title VII, the net effect of the majority's ruling was to make it harder to prove a Title VII retaliation claim than before the 1991 law and with respect to other civil rights statutes that don't explicitly mention retaliation. The 5-4 majority had "seized on a provision adopted by Congress as part of an endeavor to strengthen Title VII," she concluded, "and turned it into a measure reducing the force of the ban on retaliation."

In Nassar, in ruling against a doctor of Middle Eastern descent in a case also involving egregious ethnic and national origin discrimination, Alito disregarded clear legislative history and language showing Congress' broad intent, as well as the interpretation of the law by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Interestingly, towards the end of his opinion, Alito appeared to reveal a key consideration behind the majority's decision. The ruling was important, he explained, to "the fair and responsible allocation of resources in the judicial and litigation systems." After all, he pointed out, retaliation claims "are being made with ever-increasing frequency," although he did not even consider how many have been proven meritorious. Agreeing with the EEOC and the plaintiff on the "motivating factor" standard, he wrote instead, "could also contribute to the filing of frivolous claims." As Justice Ginsburg put it, the majority "appears driven by zeal to reduce the number of retaliation claims against employers."

The other 2013 Title VII ruling also reflected an extremely narrow reading of the law. Vance v. Ball State University concerned a complaint by an African-American woman that she had been subjected to racial harassment and a racially hostile work environment. Under prior Title VII Court rulings agreed to by both conservative and moderate justices, the employer itself is often liable for such harassment claims when the harassment is committed by an employee's supervisor. But in Vance, in an opinion by Justice Alito, the familiar 5-4 Court majority significantly narrowed Title VII. It ruled that such vicarious employer liability applies only when the harassment is committed by a manager who can fire or reduce the pay or grade of the victim, not when it is committed by a manager who does not have that power but does control the day-to-day schedules, assignments, and working environment of the victim.

As Justice Ginsburg explained in dissent, the majority's holding again contradicted guidance issued by the EEOC as well as Congress' broad purpose to eliminate workplace discrimination. In fact, she pointed out, not even the university defendant in Vance itself "has advanced the restrictive definition the Court adopts." But again, Alito's opinion betrayed part of the majority's true motives. Its narrow interpretation would be "workable" and "readily applied," Alito explained. And it would promote "the limitation of employer liability in certain circumstances."

Something very different happened in the next Supreme Court case interpreting a Congressional civil rights statute: 2014's Burwell v. Hobby Lobby.

In that case, the same 5-4 majority that narrowly interpreted Title VII in Vance and Nassar adopted a very broad interpretation of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). All nine justices agreed that RFRA was enacted by Congress in response to the Supreme Court decision in Employment Division v. Smith, which restricted the protection of religious liberty by the Court under the First Amendment. But the 5-4 majority in Hobby Lobby ruled that RFRA provides "very broad protection for religious liberty" - "even broader protection than was available" under the First Amendment in pre-Smith decisions. As Justice Ginsburg put it in dissent, the majority interpreted RFRA "as a bold initiative departing from, rather than restoring, pre-Smith jurisprudence." She explained further that this broad interpretation contradicted the language of the statute, its legislative history, and a statement by the Court in a unanimous ruling in 2006 that in RFRA, Congress "adopt[ed] a statutory rule comparable to the constitutional rule rejected in Smith."

This difference in statutory interpretation was critical to the majority's ruling in Hobby Lobby -- that for-profit corporations whose owners had religious objections to contraceptives could invoke RFRA to refuse to obey the Affordable Care Act's mandate that they provide their employees with health plans under which contraceptives are available to female employees. As Justice Ginsburg explained, no previous Court decision under RFRA or the First Amendment had ever "recognized a for-profit corporation's qualification for a religious exemption" and such a ruling "surely is not grounded in the pre-Smith precedent Congress sought to preserve." The 5-4 majority's broad interpretation that RFRA applies to for-profit corporations like Hobby Lobby was obviously crucial to its holding.

In addition, however, the 5-4 majority went beyond pre-Smith case law in another crucial respect. Before a person can claim an exemption from a generally applicable law under RFRA, he or she must prove that the law "substantially burden[s] a person's exercise of religion." According to the majority, the corporations in Hobby Lobby met that standard by demonstrating that the use of certain contraceptives that could be purchased by their employees under their health plans would seriously offend the deeply held religious beliefs of their owners. As Justice Ginsburg explained, however, that ruling conflicted with pre-Smith case law on what must be shown to prove a "substantial burden." In several pre-Smith cases, the Court had ruled that there was no "substantial burden" created by, for example, the government's use of a social security number to administer benefit programs or its requirement that social security taxes be paid, despite the genuine and sincere offense that these actions caused to some religious beliefs. As Justice Ginsburg stated, such religious "beliefs, however deeply held, do not suffice to sustain a RFRA claim," except under the extremely broad interpretation of RFRA by the 5-4 Court majority.

As in the Title VII cases, Justice Alito's opinion for the 5-4 majority in Hobby Lobby was revealing about some of the majority's underlying concerns. In explaining the majority's decision to interpret RFRA as applying to for-profit corporations, Justice Alito noted that "[w]hen rights, whether constitutional or statutory, are extended to corporations, the purpose is to protect the rights of these people" - in this case "the humans who own and control those companies" in the Hobby Lobby case. As Justice Ginsburg observed, the 5-4 majority paid little attention to the Court's pronouncement in a pre-Smith case that permitting a religious exemption to a general law for a corporation would "operate[e] to impose the employer's religious faith on the employees" of the corporation.

Even though the Supreme Court's 2013-14 rulings that interpreted civil rights laws passed by Congress may seem different, a common theme animates them all. Whether the 5-4 majority interpreted the statutes broadly or narrowly, the losers in all of them were women, minorities, and working people, and the winners were employers and corporations. In the majority's own words, the result is the "limitation of employer liability" under laws like Title VII designed to protect workers and the "protecting" of the "humans who own and control" corporations under RFRA.

Since all these rulings interpret Congressional statutes, not the Constitution, Congress clearly has the authority to reverse them. In fact, Congress has done exactly that with respect to other 5-4 rulings by the Court that misinterpreted civil rights statutes to harm women and minority workers and benefit their corporate employers. As recently as 2009, the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act reversed a flawed 5-4 ruling that severely restricted workers' ability to file equal pay claims under Title VII. Congress is already considering legislation to reverse many of the effects of Hobby Lobby, a corrective effort that Senate Republicans have blocked by a filibuster to prevent the full Senate from even considering it. In our currently divided Congress, immediate prospects for the passage of such remedial legislation may not appear promising. But it is important to recognize the current 5-4 majority's pattern of favoring corporations and harming workers in its decisions interpreting federal civil rights laws, and to recognize and act on the ability to reverse these harmful rulings.

PFAW Foundation

'And So It Begins': God Is Calling On Glenn Beck To Stand With Israel And He Needs A Plane

On his radio broadcast today, Glenn Beck announced that God is calling him to go to Israel, which he will be doing in the next week or so in order to publicly take a stand with Israel and its people and ensure that "the genocidal maniacs don't get control of a Jewish state," declaring that  "they will have to roll the tanks over me" before he allows another genocide to take place.

Saying that he feels that he was supposed to be in Israel this weekend, Beck said they simply were unable to pull it off because he does not own a plane.

"Quite honestly, let me just say this out in existence," Beck bluntly stated, "I need an airplane. How's that one? I need an airplane. One that can go global."

Announcing that his Mercury One charity will be delivering a planeload of supplies to the Israeli Defense Forces today, Beck said that everything he has been working toward over the last several is now being put to the test.

"This is it! Game time!," he declared. "Everything I've been talking about the last five years? It's on! Now it begins. And so it begins. This is it. This is the moment that will separate the girls from the boys, the men from the women. This is it."

Not sure how all of this is going to play out, Beck grew emotional as he proclaimed that when he dies, the people who know him will be able to say that he "did everything he could to remain a human."

"My status and citizenship in the Kingdom of God comes first over my citizenship in this country," he said, choking back tears. "My being a human outranks my being an American and if those are ever flipped, America and being an American mean nothing anyway":

Current Middle East Conflict Predictably Fuels Bizarrely Incoherent Theories From Glenn Beck

Yesterday, Glenn Beck got very upset by a decision by the FAA to prohibit U.S. airlines from "flying to or from Israel's Ben Gurion International Airport for a period of up to 24 hours" after a Hamas rocket hit a home approximately a mile from the airport.

On his radio show, Beck bizarrely fumed that this move was an effort to punish and blame Israel for the current conflict and was all part of the Obama administration's ongoing "anti-Israel actions." Beck went so far as to even apologize to Israel on America's behalf, saying "forgive us, for we know not what we do."

Beck returned to this crazy theory last night on his television program where he asserted that if a commercial airplane traveling to Israel were to be shot down by Hamas, the entire world would immediately blame Israel, which would then rapidly descend into vicious anti-Semitic attacks about how all Jews are "greedy, capitalist Zionists" who only care about money.

"That is what it would turn into," Beck said. "And that is exactly the situation this administration has now put Israel in":

Conservative Writer Claims Voting For Elizabeth Warren Is Part Of A 'Communist Coup'

As part of Matt Barber’s apparent quest to bring down the Religious Right from the inside by making it look completely ridiculous, his website today published this column by contributor Luke Hamilton about how the “Demokratik Party” is deciding between “Shrillary” and the “hardcore socialist progressive” Elizabeth Warren.

Hamilton writes that Hillary Clinton may not capture the “Demokratik” nomination because “she has looked more ready for a knockout than the Oval Office. It’s hard to tell with her pantsuits, but those legs look rubbery and her corner has got to be concerned.”

If voters instead nominate and elect Warren president, Hamilton warns, it would represent “a contiguous communist coup with long-ranging repercussions.”

That’s right, voters using the democratic, constitutional process to elect a president are actually carrying out a communist coup!

At one point, it seemed virtually predetermined that Shrillary would be the 2016 Demokratik Presidential candidate. So it’s surprising that recently she has looked more ready for a knockout than the Oval Office. It’s hard to tell with her pantsuits, but those legs look rubbery and her corner has got to be concerned. Her political blunders over the past several weeks seem to confirm the fact that the political acumen in that family resides exclusively in Bubba. For someone with such extensive experience with the limelight and televised interviews, it is hard to believe that she misspoke so badly by claiming poverty after Bill left office. She has since tried to fall back on relativism and insist that she and Bill aren’t broke but they’re also not like some of those people who are “truly well off”. Riiiight, because the rest of us have made $100m over the past 20 years.



But hold the phone! There appears to be a new snout in the pigpen. The whisper campaign is gaining a full head of steam to draft Senator Elizabeth “Fauxcohontas” Warren into the race for President. According to Edward Klein, the author of Blood Feud: The Clintons vs. The Obamas, the President has tasked Valerie Jarrett with the job of convincing Elizabeth Warren to run in 2016. It is hard to know if Klein’s sources are accurate, but it is logical to think that Obama is involved in this effort. Primarily because Obama is incessantly distracted from doing his actual job by anything and everything. This project would allow him to avoid geopolitical crises like the Islamification of Iraq, unknown numbers of people (with unknown identities!) pouring over our borders, ongoing attacks faced by our allies Ukraine & Israel, and an American economy more fragile than the sanity of Ed Schultz. Also, it’s logical to think that Obama would be interested in convincing Warren to run for President because playing Kingmaker to the next progressive socialist in the White House would scratch his egomaniacal itch and cement his name as the first of a new generation of Marxist “forefathers” who fundamentally transformed the United States into poverty-stricken irrelevancy. A Chicago Machine Marxist is an unfortunate accident, a Chicago Machine Marxist followed by an East Coast Socialist Egghead is a contiguous communist coup with long-ranging repercussions.



What would a Warren Presidency mean for the country? Like Obama, she’s a hardcore socialist progressive, but there is a subtle difference. Obama seems to feel the need to explain his redistributive policies, almost apologetically at times. Warren is unashamed of her avarice. Her boilerplate stump speech seems to suggest that she would be able to tap into the populist anger which Clinton is so desperately trying to access; anger at the capitalist cronies who have benefited from the Clinton, Bush, and Obama presidencies. But unlike libertarian conservatives, who share her anger at crony capitalism, her only solution seems to be the vilification of success and the exponential growth of central authority. In many ways, a Warren presidency would complete the transformation begun on Barack’s watch, which explains why Jarrett is helping measure lawn space for Elizabeth’s presidential teepee.

Jody Hice Says The Second Amendment Gives Citizens The Right To Own 'Cannons And Bazookas And Missiles'

As Miranda noted yesterday, Jody Hice, a Religious Right activist and radio host with a long history of making outrageous statements, won a run-off election in Georgia to become the official Republican Party nominee for a seat in Congress.

Hice seems to have almost completely wiped away the archives of his radio broadcasts when he decided to run for office but some of his programs still remain available, such as this one posted on YouTube in which Hice reacts to the 2012 shooting that killed twelve people at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado by blaming the separation of church and state, legal abortion, and evolution.

"The more the Judeo-Christian principles of our Founders are removed," Hice said, "the more you can expect Batman theater-type events taking place, the more you can expect Columbine and Virginia Tech-type tragedies occurring in America. This is what you get absent God."

Hice went on to blame things like legal abortion and the teaching of evolution is schools for conditioning people to accept the idea that "life is meaningless" and "the more we promote that junk ... the more we will get this type of result":

Hice then spent the second half of his program warning that liberals would seek to use the shooting to push for gun control, prompting him to stake out the extreme position that there are to be no limits on the Second Amendment because American citizens have the right to possess literally any weapon that the government possesses.

"It is my belief that any, any, any, any weapon that our government and law enforcement possesses," Hice said, "ought to be allowed for individuals to possess in this country."

Apparently this applies to tanks, fighter jets, and even nuclear weapons because, Hice argued, so long as people can pay for them and don't have a criminal record, they have a right to protect themselves from a tyrannical government with the same weapons that the government can use against them.

"The Second Amendment," he said, "is about us defending ourselves against potentially tyrannical government. You cannot defend yourself with a BB gun if your opponent has cannons and bazookas and missiles":

Glenn Beck Is Very Receptive To The Idea That Jesus Was Married To Mary Magdalene: 'You Could Talk Me Into That'

A few months ago, Glenn Beck was invited to speak at Liberty University where, in addition to presenting himself as a prophet of God, he set off a bit of controversy by preaching Mormon theology from the stage while repeatedly insisting that Mormonism is simply a "different denomination" of Christianity.

The claim that Mormonism is simply another branch of Christianity predictably did not sit well with various Religious Right activists who criticized Liberty University for allowing Beck to come and preach this doctrine at the school, which prompted Beck to lash out in response, accusing these critics of "standing for hate and bigotry."

One of Beck's most loyal defenders within the Religious Right movement is David Barton, who regularly seeks to assure those concerned about Beck's Mormonism, especially as it pertains to his increasing influence as a religious leader within the movement, by claiming that Beck is really just a Mormon in name only, insisting that Beck is simply a Mormon only out of loyalty and is actually a Christian when it comes to all of the things that really matter.

Barton was among those who went down to the southern border with Beck last weekend to deliver supplies to churches who are providing assistance in response to the border crisis and was on Beck's radio program yesterday, where the two discussed the trip. Beck said that he believes "miracles" are occurring because of these sorts of efforts, resulting in leaders from Christian denominations being willing to put aside their specific "religion" in order to focus more on their shared Christian "faith."

"Now, I'm seeing people get together," Beck said, "and they're not abandoning their theology but what they're doing is they're saying 'my religion comes second to my faith in God ... My faith and what the Lord tells me to do comes first.'"

This effort on Beck's part to continually assure others in the Religious Right movement that Mormonism is simply a "different denomination" of the Christian faith probably took a bit of a blow later in the program when he and his co-hosts were discussing a recent poll examining how many Americans believe in various conspiracy theories that eventually evolved into a conversation about what beliefs they hold that others might dismiss as conspiracy theories.

During the discussion, Beck's co-host Pat Gray asserted that he "absolutely believes" that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene. Gray, like Beck, is also a Mormon and this belief, while not being official LDS doctrine, is a common one among Mormons, and it is one that Beck likewise appears to share.

"You could talk me into that," Beck said, arguing that it was simply impossible for Mary Magdalene to have been traveling closely with Jesus and his disciples unless she had been married to him.

"It just wouldn't have happened," he said. "A bunch of guys traveling around with a women? Unmarried? I don't think so":

Klingenschmitt: Religions That Require Women To Marry Their Rapists Are Demonic

Earlier this month, India's Supreme Court ruled that fatwas issued by Sharia courts carried no legal power and could not be enforced by the government or against the will of those who refuse to abide by them.

Gordon Klingenschmitt was quite pleased with this decision because, as he said on today's "Pray In Jesus Name" program, Islam is a false and demonic religion as demonstrated by the fact that it requires women who have been raped to marry their rapist.

"That's a demonic spirit," Klingenschmitt said, "when you force a woman to marry her rapist and you call that good practicing of Islam. I think Islam is demonic so far as it teaches that kind of teaching."

Apparently, Klingenschmitt has never read the Bible, specifically Deuteronomy 22:28-29:

28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

Staver: Tolerance Of Homosexuality 'Will Be The Downfall Of Our Civilization'

Last week, megachurch pastor John MacArthur told Glenn Beck's The Blaze website that churches that condone homosexuality "have no allegiance to the Bible ... they have no relationship to scripture, they are the apostate church, they are Satan’s church."

Not surprisingly, Mat Staver and Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel are in complete agreement, praising MacArthur's tough stance on their "Faith and Freedom" radio broadcast as Staver added his own warning that tolerance of homosexuality "ultimately will be the downfall of our civilization."

"Homosexuality is against nature," Staver declared. "It is against nature to have two men and two women engaging in sexual activity. It is against the Scripture to do that ... This sinful behavior is being promoted as good, natural, and normal. It is something, I think, that ultimately will be the downfall of our civilization if we continue to go down this road":

Fourth Circuit Unanimously Upholds Obamacare Subsidies

Judge Davis's concurring opinion blasts the illogical premise and political nature of the anti-ACA lawsuit.
PFAW Foundation

Gordon Klingenschmitt Says Those Who Can't Enter Church Shouldn't Be Able To Use Public Restrooms

On his "Pray In Jesus Name" program yesterday, Gordon Klingenschmitt discussed a lawsuit filed against Hobby Lobby by a transgender female employee who claims that she was denied access to the women's restroom facilities.

Klingenschmitt, of course, was not at all sympathetic, citing Deuteronomy 23 to argue that since transgender people are not allowed in church, they should not be allowed to use gender-appropriate bathrooms.

"The Scriptures say in Deuteronomy 23," Klingenschmitt said, "that he that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord. And if they can't enter the congregation of the Lord, they certainly shouldn't be allowed to enter the ladies bathroom":

Gays Are Possessed By 'Putrid Smelling' Demons That Even Pigs Won't Tolerate

Bert Farias, founder of Holy Fire Ministries, had a piece published on Charisma Magazine's website today in which he begged gay people to "please do not get upset with me" for trying to tell them "the raw, naked truth about homosexuality," promising that if they will just listen to him, they "will see that I am actually trying to help you."

And Farias' message of love is that "being gay is a choice" and choosing to be gay puts one at risk of engaging in "unclean practices that open up a person to the demonic."

And once that happens, gays become possessed by stinky demons that even pigs won't tolerate:

Here's the raw, naked truth: Homosexuality is actually a demon spirit. It is such a putrid smelling demon that other demons don't even like to hang around it. A genuine prophet of God told me that the Lord allowed him to smell this demon spirit, and he got sick to his stomach. And yet as humans, many embrace this demon. Yes, you heard me right. Being gay is demonic.

There is an account in the Bible where Jesus casts out 2,000 demons out of a man. The demons came out screaming and begged Jesus to send them into the pigs. The pigs didn't want them, so they ran down a steep hill and were drowned in the sea. Pigs have more sense than some humans. People embrace homosexual demons, but the pigs would rather die than be possessed with demons.

"Now a large herd of swine was feeding there near the mountains. So all the demons begged Him, saying, 'Send us to the swine, that we may enter them.' And at once Jesus gave them permission. Then the unclean spirits went out and entered the swine (there were about two thousand); and the herd ran violently down the steep place into the sea, and drowned in the sea" (Mark 5:11-13).

From a biblical perspective the rise of homosexuality is a sign that a society is in the last stages of decay. And here is another terrible truth: As people continue to reject God, He gives them over to increasingly immoral and self-destructive activities. There are destructive physical, emotional, and spiritual consequences resulting from homosexual behavior.

All human beings know deep in their hearts that God exists, and they all know something of His moral standards. But people's unrighteousness leads them to suppress the truth and leads them to believe false views of God and the Bible, and they twist the scriptures to their own destruction, because they know that the truth would require them to repent.

Allow me to school you in Basic Sex 101. If being gay was natural, two men or two women could produce a baby, but they can't. Their sexual reproductive organs do not complement each other therefore making it impossible for them to procreate. It can never be natural for two men or two women to get married and live together. Our culture's acceptance and celebration of gay behavior will never make it right. Wrong is wrong no matter how many people are for it. And right is right no matter how many people are against it. Homosexuality is not new. It's been around for thousands of years. It's as old as the devil himself.

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious