In his latest WorldNetDaily column, Alan Keyes warns that “so-called libertarians” have a “rebellious arrogance that disdains decent self-government” because they are unable to see “the distinction between liberty and licentiousness.”
Keyes specifically pointed to gay rights as a reason to oppose libertarians: “By promoting so-called homosexual rights, they are engaged in a general offensive to disparage, subvert and ultimately deny the constitutional rights” of the “God-endowed family, the primordial institution that is the paradigm, in terms both of liberty and obligation, for natural justice and human community.”
He concludes that the “regressive elitist faction agenda” will discard “the incomparably successful American experiment in principled self-government” and “give way, first to disorder and dissolution and then, in all likelihood, to the most thoroughly totalitarian elitist despotism humankind has ever known.”
Thus, as a logical consequence of the principles of the Declaration, every valid claim of right is associated with the freedom to exercise the right. But in light of those same principles, not every exercise of freedom entails a valid claim of right. This is the essential point forgotten or willfully rejected by many so-called libertarians these days. As a result, they advocate positions that ignore what America’s founders were determined to respect, to wit, the distinction between liberty and licentiousness; and between the wholesome courage wherewith we stand upon our rights and the rebellious arrogance that disdains decent self-government.
As I point out in the essay on Ninth Amendment rights quoted above, the Declaration’s logic in this respect allows Americans to recognize and properly assert rights not mentioned in the Constitution. The 9th Amendment exists to provide them with clear constitutional grounds upon which to stand as they invoke these rights, as constraints upon government power.
At the moment, the relevance of this constitutional claim is painfully obvious. The elitist faction forces presently controlling the U.S. government and some state governments (including Republicans as well as Democrats) are moving to deny the constitutional right of individuals or states to oppose the taking of human life, as required by the first law of “nature and Nature’s God.” They are doing so in the context of an insidious, persistent assault on Second Amendment rights. They are also doing so in the context of Obamacare, as they prepare, by force of unconstitutional edicts and “laws,” to deny the constitutional right of individuals and States to refuse complicity in so-called health-care practices that disregard this same life-preserving natural law obligation. In addition, by promoting so-called homosexual rights, they are engaged in a general offensive to disparage, subvert and ultimately deny the constitutional rights – rooted in obligations antecedent to any and all humanly instituted law or government – that are inherent in the God-endowed family, the primordial institution that is the paradigm, in terms both of liberty and obligation, for natural justice and human community.
The Constitution’s Ninth Amendment provides the key to recognizing and justifying legal and other moves to oppose what amounts, on every front, to a wholesale assault on the first principle of constitutional self-government in the United States, i.e., the Declaration’s affirmation of God-endowed individual rights. Next week I plan to post an article at my blog in which I will discuss specific instances in which politicians and other public figures, who claim to be conservatives, are cooperating with this assault. By discussing these examples, I hope to awaken Americans committed to our founding principles, and to the constitutional republic based upon them, to a simple fact: No one prominently associated with, or promoted by, either of the so-called major parties appears to shares this commitment. Unless Americans who do share it rouse themselves and unite against the regressive elitist faction agenda, the incomparably successful American experiment in principled self-government will give way, first to disorder and dissolution and then, in all likelihood, to the most thoroughly totalitarian elitist despotism humankind has ever known.
WASHINGTON – Today 42 elected officials from 20 states and Young Elected Officials Action, a program of People For the American Way representing the interests of elected officials age 35 and under, called on House and Senate leaders to work toward the passage of common-sense gun violence prevention reforms. In a letter to House and Senate leaders, the elected officials write that until Congress passes “meaningful gun violence prevention measures” such as criminal background checks for every gun sale, state and local elected officials are “limited” in what they can do to address the problem in their own communities.
“No child should fear going to school in the morning, no parent should fear a trip to the grocery store, and no teenagers should fear walking the streets of their own neighborhood,” the letter states.
Elected officials who have signed the letter include city councilmembers, state senators and representatives, a mayor, and Sunnyside Unified School District board member Daniel Hernandez – the former intern credited with saving Representative Gabby Giffords’ life.
The full text of the letter is below.
Dear Leader Reid, Leader McConnell, Speaker Boehner, and Leader Pelosi:
We, state and local elected officials from 20 states and Young Elected Officials Action – a program of People For the American Way representing the interests of elected officials age 35 and under – write to express our deep concern about the gun violence devastating communities across the country and to urge you to take meaningful action to curb it. As mayors, and members of school boards, city and county councils, and state legislatures, we are charged with ensuring the safety and security of our communities. But until Congress takes action to implement meaningful gun violence prevention measures, we are limited in what we can do to reduce gun violence in our own communities.
The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence estimates that approximately 100,000 Americans are victims of gun violence each year. Many others count the victims of such violence among their family and friends. This violence has a devastating effect on individual lives and on our communities as a whole. No child should fear going to school in the morning, no parent should fear a trip to the grocery store, and no teenagers should fear walking the streets of their own neighborhood. That fear, fed by a lawless market in deadly weapons, erodes our efforts to create strong schools, safe neighborhoods and healthy local economies.
That is why YEO Action and the undersigned are calling for common-sense reforms to make the country safer. These include: requiring a criminal background check for every gun sale; making illegal gun trafficking a federal crime; removing military-style assault weapons from our communities; and banning the use of high-capacity magazines that have no use but mass carnage. These basic changes would not end gun violence in our country, but they would help to curb the epidemic of violence that has devastated so many American lives.
Every person has the right to be safe in our schools, homes, and neighborhoods. Today we call upon you, leaders of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, to adopt these common-sense and vitally important measures.
Danielle Adams, Soil/Water Conservation District Supervisor, Durham, NC
Ben Allen, School Board President, Santa Monica, CA
Mandela Barnes, State Representative, Milwaukee, WI
Alex Breland, School Council Member, Chicago, IL
Dwight Bullard, State Senator, Miami, FL
Joe Carn, City Council Member, College Park, GA
Adam Carranza, School Board Member, El Monte, CA
Leland Cheung, City Council Member, Cambridge, MA
Janet Chin, School Board Member, Rosemead, CA
Enbar Cohen, City Commissioner, Aventura, FL
Xilonin Cruz-Gonzalez, Azusa USD Board Clerk, Azusa, CA
Marcus C. Evans, Jr., State Representative, Chicago, IL
Wesley Farrow, Neighborhood Council Board Member, Inglewood, CA
Bill Ferguson, State Senator, Baltimore, MD
Carmelo Garcia, School Board Member, Hoboken, NJ
Angela Garretson, City Council Member, Hillside, NJ
Robert J. Gignac, Lowell School Committeeman, Lowell, MA
Andrew Gillum, City Commissioner, Tallahassee, FL
Mike Gipson, City Council Member, Carson, CA
Jennifer Gregerson, City Council Member, Mukilteo, WA
Mike Hays, City Council Member, Spring City, PA
Daniel Hernandez, School Board Member, Tucson, AZ
Dar'shun Kendrick, State Representative, Lithonia, GA
Kevin Killer, State Representative, Pine Ridge, SD
Roland Lemar, State Representative, New Haven, CT
Alex Lewy, City Commissioner, Hallandale Beach, FL
Josh Maxwell, Mayor, Downingtown, PA
Wendell Mosby, Community College Trustee, Chicago, IL
Quentin Phipps, City Treasurer, Middletown, CT
Kesha Ram, State Representative, Burlington, VT
Craig Rice, City Council Member, Rockville, MD
Jacque Robinson, City Council Member, Pasadena, CA
Jesus Rubalcava, School Governing Board Member/ State Association Officer, Gila Bend, AZ
Kristie Renee Sepulveda-Burchit, School District Board Trustee, Rancho Cucamonga, CA
Andrew Smith, City Council Member, Middletown, OH
Brent Steeno, Alderman, Grandview, MO
Rashida Tlaib, State Representative, Detroit, MI
Michael Unis, Board of Education Member, Verona, NJ
Virgil Watkins, City Council Member, Macon, GA
Lea Webb, City Council Member, Binghamton, NY
Alan Williams, State Representative, Tallahassee, FL
Justen Wright, City Council Member, Wilmington, DE
People For the American Way
Brad Dacus of the Pacific Justice Institute discussed the upcoming Supreme Court cases on marriage equality yesterday with host Jim Schneider on VCY America’s Crosstalk.
After a caller on the show ranted about how homosexuality is “Satanic,” Schneider called it an “anti-God lifestyle.” Dacus agreed and added that homosexuality, along with “looseness in the heterosexual community,” are signs that society is “openly waving our fist at God.”
Dacus said increasing support for marriage equality proves that people are unaware of the dangers of homosexuality: “When you look at it statistically, the medical ramifications, the psychiatric ramifications, the suicide rate, they’re way off the charts.”
“If we’re a compassionate nation, a loving nation and we care,” Dacus explained, “then we’re not going to want to salute something that is so dangerous and so destructive statistically to so many people who decide to engage in it.”
Schneider: We’re seeing a mass exodus Brad from those who once held to the belief to capitulate to the winds that are blowing today in our society and even a poll just released this week by the Washington Post and ABC News indicating support for same-sex marriage has never been higher, they claim that 58 percent of Americans now believe gay and lesbian couples should be allowed to wed.
Dacus: It’s most unfortunate because it’s a slippery slope, number one, and number two they’re not taking into account the real meaning which is to dilute the sanctity and the definition of marriage that God has given us and that the laws of nature have given us and there’s going to be ramifications for that. When you look at it statistically, the medical ramifications, the psychiatric ramifications, the suicide rate, they’re way off the charts and so how anyone can think that it’s in the best interest of America, promoting our general welfare, to change our definition of marriage in view of the ramifications and impact, just purely from an objective and secular perspective, makes absolutely no sense and I think we need to be better communicators of that harm. If we’re a compassionate nation, a loving nation and we care, then we’re not going to want to salute something that is so dangerous and so destructive statistically to so many people who decide to engage in it.
He argued that the members of the United Methodist church in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, which decided not to perform marriages as long as same-sex couples are denied marriage rights, are “betrayers of the teachings of the Lord” and “have decided to no longer make the Lord the lord of their life or lord of their church.”
Schneider: Another disturbing report came out Monday from CBS News that the Green Street United Methodist Church in North Carolina is actually electing to stop performing marriage ceremonies for straight couples until same-sex marriage is legalized and asking other churches to join them. Brad, in cases like this all I see is the word Ichabod, “the glory of God has departed.”
Dacus: Yeah, when a church decides to take that position it’s discouraging to see them do that because they obviously have decided to no longer make the Lord the lord of their life or lord of their church. They decided to follow the ways of man and “what tickles the ear of the day.” You know Galatians makes it very clear that we can’t be both pleasers of man and pleasers of God which means sometimes we’re not going to be very popular, sometimes when society decides to turn a different direction we can be rejected. But when you see churches do that and people holding themselves out as followers of the Lord and yet being betrayers of the teachings of the Lord and of scripture, it’s very serious to not only the congregation but it’s also especially serious to those in leadership positions abusing their authority.
Sen. Rand Paul’s chief of staff Doug Stafford appears to be scrambling to explain the Senator’s recent comments during a CNN interview where he said there would be “thousands of exceptions” to his “Life at Conception Act,” a federal personhood bill that would ban all abortion by granting legal status to embryos. He added that “each individual case would have to be addressed” and that there will “be a lot of complicated things the law may not ultimately be able to address in the early stages of pregnancy that would have to be part of what occurs between the physician and the woman and the family.”
Understandably, many people interpreted his comments to mean that the government shouldn’t be intruding on the medical decisions that are unique to each woman, or the opposite of what his sweeping anti-choice law would do.
But in an interview with LifeSiteNews, Stafford stressed that Paul’s mention of “thousands of exceptions” only “meant that a singular exception to save the life of the mother would likely cover thousands of individual cases.”
So the “thousands of exceptions” was only really one exception.
And when Paul said that women, their doctord and their families would be free from government interference during the early stage of the pregnancy, Stafford said that Paul was only referring to emergency contraception that prevents fertilization.
Emergency contraception, of course, only works up to 120 hours after sexual intercourse.
Stafford noted that such methods won’t be covered by the law because “it is not practically possible to legislate things like the morning after pill or other emergency contraception,” while stressing that Paul still seeks to ban RU-486.
Some pro-life activists were left scratching their heads after a recent interview Senator Rand Paul did on Wolf Blitzer’s CNN show “The Situation Room,” in which the senator seemed to say he supported “thousands of exceptions” to his general belief that abortion should be illegal. But Paul spokesman Doug Stafford told LifeSiteNews.com in an interview on Wednesday that the senator’s remarks were misunderstood, reiterating that Paul is staunchly pro-life.
After the interview, the Atlantic Wire ran a story with the headline “Rand Paul Isn’t 100% Pro-life Anymore,” arguing that the language Paul used in his answer sounded remarkably similar to pro-choice rhetoric claiming abortion should always be a private matter between a woman and her doctor.
But Paul’s chief of staff, Doug Stafford, said the Atlantic got it wrong.
Paul “was speaking medically,” Stafford said.
By “thousands of exceptions,” Stafford told LifeSiteNews.com, Paul meant that a singular exception to save the life of the mother would likely cover thousands of individual cases – for example, ectopic pregnancies or others that directly threaten the mother’s life.
The senator is not in favor of the more nebulous “health of the mother” exception that pro-life advocates argue can be applied to any woman facing an unwanted pregnancy.
But what about Paul’s statement that the Life at Conception Act may not be able to address early abortions? That, too, was a misunderstanding, according to Stafford. He said the senator was talking about things like emergency contraception pills, which may cause very early abortions, but since they contain the exact same drugs used in standard birth control pills, the senator believes they will be nearly impossible to ban.
Senator Paul “has always said it is not practically possible to legislate things like the morning after pill or other emergency contraception,” Stafford said. “It simply isn't possible to do so. The law will likely never be able to reach that.”
“You can legislate abortifacients like RU-486, and he would,” he said. “But you can’t legislatively ban artificial estrogen and progesterone.”
WASHINGTON – Four years into President Obama’s presidency, he has yet to have a single judge confirmed to the hugely influential Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. This lapse, caused initially by a slow start from the administration but perpetuated by a blockade of obstruction in the Senate, threatens to hinder progressive advances for years to come, argues a new report from People For the American Way.
The report, AMERICA’S PROGRESS AT RISK: RESTORING BALANCE TO THE DC CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS, can be found here: http://www.pfaw.org/media-center/publications/america-s-progress-risk-restoring-balance-dc-circuit-court-appeals
“The D.C. Circuit is the most important court most Americans have never heard of,” said Marge Baker, Executive Vice President of People For the American Way. “The D.C. Circuit’s judges have the final word on scores of federal laws each year, from air pollution controls to financial regulations to workers’ rights. Republicans have long understood this, and have packed the court with far-right ideologues who threaten to hold back American progress for decades to come. And they have so far blocked confirmation of judges who would bring any balance to this court."
President Obama is the first president since Woodrow Wilson to fail to have a single nominee confirmed to the D.C. Circuit during his first full term in office, despite the fact that four of the eleven seats on the court are now vacant. His first nominee to the court, the indisputably qualified Caitlin Halligan, was twice blocked by Senate Republicans for reasons widely recognized as spurious.
As a result, the D.C. Circuit continues to be dominated by judges pushing a right-wing ideology long rejected by the American people. The right-wing majority of the D.C. Circuit has continuously sought to dismantle progressive efforts to defend consumers, protect public health, and ensure the rights of workers. Recent D.C. Circuit decisions highlighted in the report include:
“President Obama has a chance in his second term to restore ideological balance to the D.C. Circuit,” added Marge Baker. “It is critically important that he do so. Otherwise, D.C. Circuit will continue to stand in the way of progressive reforms -- reforms chosen by American voters -- and threaten to roll back decades of hard-won protections for working people and consumers."
With Republicans in Washington looking to moderate the party’s rhetoric on immigration, Virginia Attorney General – and gubernatorial candidate – Ken Cuccinelli is attempting to airbrush his anti-immigration record by removing material from his website. Unfortunately for Cuccinelli, the Internet just doesn’t work that way.
A cached version of his site from February 25th highlights his right-wing record and views. It boasts of his votes against in-state tuition for undocumented students and his crackdowns on hiring undocumented workers. That page is now gone, as are pages opposing gun control and abortion. It seems Cuccinelli thinks he can sidestep his extreme record by simply removing it from his website, or as the Washington Post put it, "Mr. Cuccinelli hasn’t shifted his position; he’s just removed it from public view."
Of course, even the amazing vanishing web pages didn’t include some of Cuccinelli’s most extreme views on immigration, such as his support for Arizona’s SB 1070 and his comparison of immigration policy to pest control. Cuccinelli can play with his website all he likes, but he can’t hide from his extreme, far-right record.
Following a news story on the 700 Club about the Profitable Sunrise investment scam, televangelist Pat Robertson told viewers to beware “scamsters in religious garb quoting the Bible, I mean run from them.”
Of course, if CBN viewers actually followed Robertson's advice, he'd be in deep trouble.
Steve Deace once again hosted far-right activist Michael Peroutka on his radio show to discuss the talk show host’s latest column on same-sex marriage and why we should not “validate relationships western civilization, heavily influenced by Biblical moral teaching, has up until now said for over a thousand years were immoral, destructive, and counter-procreative.” Peroutka explained that “the state has perverted” what “God called marriage,” and if we followed God’s laws then there would be “no way we are ever going to validate homo or sodomite-unmarriage.”
This can’t last, we are killing our own children, we are burying our own country; at some point reality has to set in. I like to use the term ‘reality,’ another term you use in your article you talk about if we can ‘wave a magic wand’ and that’s interesting because that’s an allusion to illusion. But what we really need is a dose of reality, what we need to do is wave reality over this situation and go back to what God called marriage, not what the state has perverted the definition to be but what God called marriage. That’s what we need to return to. There is no way we are ever going to validate homo or sodomite-unmarriage because God defined marriage as between a man and a woman once and forever.
Apparently the reason we aren’t following God’s moral code on the issue of marriage or other social issues, according to Peroutka, is because of the Union's victory in the Civil War, or as he called it: “The War Between the States.”
He argued that the South’s defeat opened the door to a “huge black hole of centralized power,” which means that people began looking to the government, rather than God, as the source of their rights.
Peroutka said that “the real effect of the War and the Reconstruction after the war was to take the very foundation of our understanding of our rights away from us, that is to say that they come from God, and put them in the hands of men,” who can then change the meaning of concepts like marriage.
Somehow we don’t think that this neo-Confederate logic is going to do a lot to help marriage equality opponents rescue their plummeting poll numbers.
Deace: What we’re coming down to here is: What is the law? Who determines it? How do we know that’s the right determination? Who gets to essentially apply and impose their interpretation of where the law comes from and what the law is? And we’re seeing that played out and frankly divisively with the marriage issue.
Peroutka: That’s right. When you ask me a question about this issue or other social issues, I always go back to these two standards: What does God say and what does the Constitution say? I don’t go to what many people, political talking heads, go to: What is politically effective? What does conservatism say? What does the Republican Party say? I go where our founders would’ve gone and where they did in fact go to declare their independence from Great Britain, they said: What does God say about this? And then in this case, what does the constitution say? So those are the standards I’m always going to use, it’s a new issue but it’s the same standard.
Deace: It’s the standard that founded this country, all the way from the Puritans to the people that ratified the Constitution.
Peroutka: And ever since, well there have been a number of watershed events in American history that have taken us away from this view that I’m describing, this American view. One of them was ‘The War Between the States.’ Ever since then there’s been this huge black hole of centralized power that’s formed in Washington D.C. People sometimes talk about ‘The War Between the States’ as being about the issue of slavery, I believe that history is written by the winners, it wasn’t about that at all. What it was about was consolidating power into the hands of a few people.
One of the best ways I’ve ever heard this explained to me was I was at a formal dinner party one time and a number of us at the table, a couple of gentlemen were talking about this issue and one lady piped up and she said, “Now don’t you start talking about that my great-great-granddaddy fought for the state of Illinois.” A gentleman at the table looked at her and said, “Mam, your great-great-granddaddy didn’t fight for Illinois, he fought for Washington D.C., maybe New York City, the banking interests, and by so doing he conquered Illinois, along with South Carolina and Tennessee and Alabama.” It was one of the best ways I think I’ve ever heard it explained because the real effect of the War and the Reconstruction after the war was to take the very foundation of our understanding of our rights away from us, that is to say that they come from God, and put them in the hands of men and say that they come from the Supreme Court or they come from the legislature or they come from the executive.
Angered by Sen. Rob Portman’s newfound support for marriage equality and an unofficial pro-gay rights panel at CPAC, Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality is warning the GOP against “trying to ‘out-gay’ the Democrats.”
LaBarbera’s advises Portman and others to treat their gay family members like drug addicts rather than support them, which he says would be “like telling a loved one who is has a drug problem: ‘I love you so much that I’m going to send you a five ounces of cocaine every month, because that’s how much I care.’”
He claims Portman “kicked God to the curb” and that Hillary Clinton, who recently endorsed marriage equality, “blasphemes her Creator.”
“No nation can survive moral decay of the sort America is experiencing,” LaBarbera writes. “It is the height of folly to dumb down conservatism and jettison the wholesome dictates of the Bible and Christianity because the “Glee” Generation has a new idea about sodomy.”
In the midst of the CPAC gathering, news broke that Sen. Portman had flip-flopped on homosexual “marriage” because his 21-year-old son Will is a homosexual. Thus Portman succumbed to the emotionalism and illogic that dominate post-Christian America. Employing some awful theology, he kicked God to the curb — as is becoming habit in a land that increasingly mocks its own national motto, “In God We Trust.”
Here is a dose of Politically Incorrect truth: homosexual behavior is sinful (read: always wrong in the eyes of God), unnatural, destructive and yet – thankfully – changeable. To become homosexual-affirming because someone you love announces he or she is homosexual is the antithesis of “tough love.” It’s like telling a loved one who is has a drug problem: “I love you so much that I’m going to send you a five ounces of cocaine every month, because that’s how much I care.”
How should conservatives and Republicans respond to the tidal wave of misinformation and the largely liberal and libertarian campaign to normalize homosexual perversion? Certainly not by trying to “out-gay” the Democrats on the issue — which will never happen anyway. If the time-honored Judeo-Christian marital ethic is not worth “conserving,” what is? Shame on any “conservative” who buys into the radically egalitarian proposition that all relationships “equally” deserve marriage, and that civil rights laws should be twisted to accommodate those practicing deviant sex and gender confusion.
Moreover, both conservatives and self-styled libertarians should be outraged at the threat to liberty posed by “Big Gay Government.” Even before homosexual “marriage” emerged as the main battlefront in this debate, “sexual orientation” laws were the Left’s tool of choice to force Christians and moral-minded institutions like the Boy Scouts of America to affirm homosexuality. (The Boy Scouts went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold the right to operate by their own “morally straight” code, but “gay” activist pressure against them never let up and now the BSA is on the verge of overturning the policy.) Where is the outcry from libertarians and freedom-loving conservatives at the threat to citizens’ freedom of conscience and association posed by pro-LGBT laws — which, ironically, discriiminate [sic] against traditionalists in the name of “nondiscrimination”?
American conservatism cannot divorce itself from Christianity and biblical revelation; in fact, it is wrapped up in the defense of Judeo-Christian mores. Yes, conservatives and Christians alike will be vilified by homosexual activists if they criticize “gay marriage” or any aspect of the LGBT agenda. But what kind of conservative or Christian turns tail after getting flack for standing on principle? If ever there were a cultural tide to stand against it is the LGBT agenda and sexual immorality in general, for no nation can survive moral decay of the sort America is experiencing. (In that sense, we are not “exceptional.”)
Even if polls are semi-accurate in gauging cultural trends, bending to worldly falsehoods and irrational public policy is the stuff of humanists and moral relativists — not “conservatives” and certainly not biblical Christians who accept and defend absolute Truth (right versus wrong).
As for “gay conservatives,” beware of homosexuals like Tammy Bruce and GOProud, who sound and act much more like “gay” activists than conservatives whenever their special interest — justifying their own dysfunctional embrace of homosexuality — is involved.
As for the pro-homosexual ”Christian Left,” faithful believers must insist that homosexuality be treated like other sins in the Bible. (Have you ever heard of a “Porn-Users Pride Parade,” or been called an “adultery-phobe”?) Homosexuality is what you do, not who you are, and Jesus Christ has set many men and women free from this besetting sin. Hillary Clinton may be good at politics, but she blasphemes her Creator by using His Holy name to support her faithless push for counterfeit “marriage” based on conduct that God Himself calls an abomination.
It is the height of folly to dumb down conservatism and jettison the wholesome dictates of the Bible and Christianity because the “Glee” Generation has a new idea about sodomy. Instead, principled conservatives need to fight back against politically correct shibboleths and bravely stay the course; defend transcendent Truth against modern, secularist lies; affirm marriage (one-man, one-woman) and virtuous morality for everyone; and return to reason and the biblical idealism of yesteryear.
Pastors Kevin Swanson and Dave Buehner are no strangers to making extreme and disturbing anti-gay statements on their show Generations Radio, so it comes as no surprise that they did not exactly react well to Colorado’s passage of a civil unions bill and a Denver Post photograph of State House Majority Leader Mark Ferrandino kissing his partner.
Swanson compared Ferrandino and his partner to Ahab, the Baal worshiping king in the Bible who was married to Jezebel, and Nero, the Roman emperor who persecuted Christians, and maintained they are “showing the big middle finger to God above.”
Indeed, he said that the “Colorado government is the worst in the world” and “probably even worse than the North Korean government.”
Buehner agreed and argued that the photograph should be labeled “Capital Crime,” implying that the kiss is a crime punishable by death.
Swanson: Colorado’s become probably the worst state in the union right now and I happen to be broadcasting from the state of Colorado. The front page of the Denver Post yesterday morning gave us a picture of our leaders that is the House Majority Leader in Colorado who is celebrating and dancing on the gravestone of the old Christian order of the last 2,000 years because they have won and God is dead as far as they are concerned. We have the House Majority Leader, and by the way 10 percent of the House and Senate in Colorado are homosexuals, and Dave they are performing a homosexual act on the front page of the Denver Post, meaning that the Denver government as far as I’m concerned is probably the most immoral government, flagrantly thwarting the government of God in Heaven, and they are doing it far worse than anybody in Communist China government has ever done, probably worse than the North Korean government as well.
I would say at this point in the history of America, Colorado government is the worst in the world as far as flagrantly thwarting God’s law on the front page of the Denver Post. Dave, a homosexual act being performed in this picture on the front page of the Denver Post, just shocking, I saw you turn your head, you took one look and turned your head, you didn’t want to look at it, I’m going to turn it over.
Buehner: The headline should read ‘Capital Crime.’ A little pun intended there because it is a capital crime.
Swanson: These are our leaders. This is Ahab. This is Nero. Well, Nero did effectively the same thing, he was doing the same thing and of course he persecuted Christians, which is what happens, so not completely unusual in the history of the world. But Dave we’re talking about the apostate Christian West and showing the big middle finger to God above and thwarting his law. This is about as blatant as I’ve ever seen in my life; this is the most blatant thing I’ve seen in my life.
Buehner: This is brazen, what San Francisco has done on the city level, Colorado is now doing on the state level.
Buehner said that the story points to the “demise of Western civilization” and should have “never be brought to public life,” and Swanson said that gays and lesbians are embarking on a “mass propaganda campaign and they’re going to put Christians in prison.” Buehner added that “these people are intent on defying; giving the middle finger to the God who is…this is the anti-God religion.”
Swanson was later adamant that conservatives need to “bring down the socialist schools” and “dismantle the public schools” in order to stop the left and the gay rights movement before they “destroy our freedoms.”
The pastors later defended the Mennonite pastor Kenneth Miller, who was recently convicted for aiding Lisa Miller (no relation) in kidnapping her daughter Isabella to avoid a court order that gave Miller’s former partner Janet Jenkins custody over Isabella. Buehner even compared the kidnapping case to helping someone leave a concentration camp.
Swanson: Now Dave I just wrote a letter to this guy in care of the Amish Mennonite church in Stuarts Draft, Virginia. I have no idea who this guy is, I understand he is being persecuted for his faith and he took a righteous position. He tried to as a leader in his church develop a righteous position, what position should he take, on this particular case and it did not happen to coalesce with the United States government’s position that would render as many possible liberties and freedoms to those that violate God’s law as possible. So this man I believe took a righteous position and it was a difficult position, probably a very difficult position, it would have taken a lot of wisdom and a lot of thought — should he do this, should he do that — and he wound up taking I think a righteous position on this issue and he is being persecuted for his pains, serving three years in a jail in Virginia. At least two pastors right now in America are being persecuted, nothing in comparison to what’s happening in places like Iran, however.
Buehner: I would like to say that this Mennonite pastor did pretty much follow the path set out by Rutherford: you want to fight the case as much as you can in court and when you lose there then you flee. And they fled and he helped them to flee. If somebody wanted to leave the public schools I would help them leave the public schools; if somebody wanted to leave a concentration camp and I was in Nazi Germany I would try and help them to leave the concentration camp. I believe, and I believe this pastor also believes, that this mother and child were in deep, grave moral danger and perhaps even physical danger and their opportunity to practice the Christian faith was compromised in America so I stand with him.
She said that Obama’s speech to the UN General Assembly, where he explicitly opposed blasphemy laws, actually was supportive of blasphemy laws and especially took issue with Obama’s line that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. But to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see in the images of Jesus Christ that are desecrated, or churches that are destroyed, or the Holocaust that is denied.”
Geller told Wiles that Obama needs to “chill” and that Muhammad “may be your prophet but he’s not mine.”
It was so deeply troubling and so disturbing when you had the President of the United States Barack Obama go before the UN after our embassies had been attacked and say ‘the future does not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.’ Well first of all he’s not my prophet, so chill President of the United States you speak to everybody. He may be your prophet but he’s not mine. And then to use the weight of the United States to say you know violating the blasphemy laws is not the future, I think is pretty scary stuff, pretty scary stuff. I don’t care how they package it in the media, taking a steaming pile of dung and putting it in a Tiffany blue box with a little white ribbon, it is still dung.
Just today in her WorldNetDaily column, Geller called Obama an “Islamophile” and an “anti-Semite” who is “attempting to render parts of Jerusalem judenrein.”
She also told Wiles that Al Cardenas, the head of the American Conservative Union and the host of CPAC, met with her to discuss her complaints that the conference is “enforcing the Sharia.” Geller said that while Cardenas may not be part of the alleged Islamist takeover of CPAC, ACU board members Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan are “absolutely” allies of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Geller: Al Cardenas by the way did reach out to me, I must say this, called me a couple of times after the brouhaha and did take a meeting with me at CPAC and we’ll see what happens. You know I am not cynical; did he go on a charm offensive and mean nothing? I don’t know. Will he do something about CPAC and have more voices like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Wafa Sultan and Ibn Warraq? We’ll see.
Wiles: Is there a connection to the Muslim Brotherhood in all of this stuff going on with CPAC and Grover Norquist?
Geller: I think so via Norquist and Suhail Khan; that I can prove. I’m not saying that about Cardenas because clearly I have no proof and I won’t say things that I don’t know to be true.
Wiles: I understand but with Norquist is there a connection to the Muslim Brotherhood?
Geller: Absolutely. I mean he is very tied in with the Muslim Brotherhood groups here: ICNA, ISNA, CAIR. These groups were named as unindicted co-conspirators in the largest Hamas funding trial in our nation’s history and they were all offshoots of Hamas groups here in America in the ’90s.
Geller even maintained that “the media is aligned with the jihad force” and “self-enforces the Sharia,” agreeing with Wiles’ belief that “the left is foolishly aiding the Islamic infiltration of America.”
Geller: The media is aligned with the jihad force; the media self-enforces the Sharia; they refuse to criticize or offend or insult Islam that is in accordance with the blasphemy laws under the Sharia. Now you may say, ‘Well do you think they are deliberately enforcing the laws of the Sharia? Do you think they are saying I’m going to be Sharia compliant?’ I don’t know what’s in their minds, I would say no, but it doesn’t make a difference to me whether you’re clueless or complicit if the outcome is the same.
Wiles: The left is foolishly aiding the Islamic infiltration of America because the left thinks that if they have this alliance they will break down and destroy the last vestiges of the old America.
Geller: Yes. Look, this is a pattern; it is a leftist pattern to align itself with the totalitarian ideology of the day.
End Times broadcaster Rick Wiles of TruNews has found more “proof” to bolster his case that President Obama is a demon: The History Channel’s “The Bible” miniseries. Reacting to charges that the character depicting Satan looks similar to Obama, Wiles believes “God guided the hand of the makeup artist and blinded the eyes of everybody on the movie set while it was being recorded” so that they wouldn’t see the resemblance.
But then, Wiles claims, God “removed” the “spiritual blinders” once “the program was broadcast nationally on the History Channel.” He concludes that this is yet another “clue” from Heaven that “the man in the White House is a devil from Hell.”
As Mr. Obama prepares to enter Jerusalem this week, days before Passover, another massive swarm of locusts have entered southern Israel. Mr. Obama is not only facing a biblical plague of locust in the Middle East he is also being compared to Satan in the popular “The Bible” series on the History Channel. Sunday night’s latest chapter on the series featured Lucifer and viewers around the nation immediately thought Satan looked like Barack Obama. Mark Burnett, the creator of the miniseries, denied reports that that actor was made to look like Mr. Obama. His wife Roma Downey said “both Mark and I have nothing but respect and love for our President who is a fellow Christian.” Likewise, the History Channel denounced the internet and talk radio chatter that the Lucifer character resembles Mr. Obama, in a statement the TV network said it was “unfortunate that anybody made this false connection.”
Now here’s my take on it: I believe Mark Burnett and his wife and the History Channel. I don’t believe they intentionally portrayed the Lucifer character to look like Mr. Obama. I think God guided the hand of the makeup artist and blinded the eyes of everybody on the movie set while it was being recorded, and the spiritual blinders were removed Sunday night when the program was broadcast nationally on the History Channel. How many clues do we need from Heaven to understand that the man in the White House is a devil from Hell?
After wondering about UN Ambassador Susan Rice’s sexual orientation, American Family Association radio host Sandy Rios is now floating rumors that Hillary Clinton may be a lesbian following the former Secretary of State’s statement expressing support for marriage equality.
Citing Dick Morris, naturally, Rios speculated that Clinton may be a lesbian even though she “can’t confirm or deny anything.”
She added that Clinton has a “love of homosexuality” and consistently “endorsed and embraced all things lesbian and gay.” “We are being caught in this vortex of homosexual advocacy, it’s just amazing,” Rios concluded.
If you think that her support of lesbian and gay rights is something new, I’m sorry, she has repackaged herself so successfully but if you just do a little research on Hillary Clinton you know that her love of homosexuality goes back a very long way. I remember even when she was First Lady, that would be not the beginning of her support for this, but this would be one of the more notable things, on the UN Convention on the Rights of Women, she oversaw the whole thing, the Beijing conference. It was shocking. This was a shocking thing. I think it was in ’94 I remember interviewing women that I knew who came back from the conference and I have mentioned this on the air before but I have to mention it again, under Hillary’s leadership there were even tents on lesbian lovemaking, they we remaking sure that people defined gender there were five genders, not just two genders.
Hillary Clinton, there have long been rumors about her sexual persuasion; if you don’t know that you need to know that. I can’t confirm or deny anything; I just remember that Dick Morris was the first one to raise this publicly. He worked with Bill and Hillary Clinton for a number of years and he said on public television, I was shocked because I knew about the rumors, he actually alleged that Hillary was a — he was trying to make excuses for Bill Clinton when he was caught with Monica Lewinsky — and he basically said, I believe it was on Fox many years ago when that broke, basically hinted that Hillary was a lesbian.
All I can tell you there are rumors abound and I guess since it doesn’t matter anymore then it doesn’t matter anymore, does it? So if you think this is like a seismic shift for Hillary Clinton I can guarantee you this is not a seismic shift. She has always, as far as I know back to college, endorsed and embraced all things lesbian and gay, that is her history on this so that shouldn’t be too shocking. She has played the role of wife and cookie-making mother, I’m sorry but this is just the reality of things. We are being caught in this vortex of homosexual advocacy, it’s just amazing.
Joseph Farah writes today that lawmakers in California and New Jersey who are pushing limits on ex-gay therapy are “promoting sexual anarchy” and “child abuse.” The virluently anti-gay WorldNetDaily editor warns that the “homosexual lobby” is “dangerous and totalitarian in nature” and seeks the “the active recruitment of children into aberrant sexual lifestyles.”
At the same time American society takes this anything-goes approach to sexuality, there is one new glaring taboo being constructed in some states: Counseling and therapy for minors who want to change their sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual. Such legislation was passed by the California Legislature before being struck down by the courts.
But now similar legislation is being introduced in New Jersey, in what can fairly be described as the next big push by those promoting sexual anarchy in America.
This is an illustration of just how dangerous and totalitarian in nature the homosexual lobby truly is.
What’s happening in our society today is nothing short of the active recruitment of children into aberrant sexual lifestyles. We once called this child abuse. But today it’s official state policy. The next step, which may have been unimaginable a few years ago, is to ensure there’s no way out for those recruits.
Parents and children shouldn’t have an opportunity to explore their options in enjoying a heterosexual lifestyle. Change only works one way, according to these fiends.
Think about this: Children molested by same-sex adults are much more likely to adopt a same-sex attraction. Sometimes all those kids need is some counseling to overcome their victimization. That would be legally prohibited by the legislation now under consideration in New Jersey and the legislation passed in California.
The homosexual movement once claimed its supreme goal was to ensure that its constituents could do what they want in the privacy of their own bedrooms. That was a lie. Now they parade their sexual proclivities in our streets and in the “gay”-friendly media. It’s no longer an alternative lifestyle; it’s quickly becoming the preferred lifestyle, the brave new lifestyle, the hip and heroic lifestyle, the affirmative-action lifestyle.
Now the homosexual movement and its allies in the popular culture, media and politics are seeking to use the police power of the state to make sure there’s no return from a “choice” made even as a child. Once “gay,” always “gay” is their credo.
Gary DeMar of American Vision, a Christian Reconstructionist group, is out with two new columns attacking Hillary Clinton and Rob Portman for endorsing marriage equality. Yesterday, DeMar warned that marriage rights for same-sex couples would eventually mean that parents would have no legal recourse to stop pedophiles from molesting their children.
Is Hillary saying that full citizenship requires that people be able to marry anybody they want?
Does this mean that a father can marry his 17-year-old daughter or son? Will laws prohibiting incestuous marriages be considered a violation of a person’s full and equal citizenship rights?
Maybe not now, but who can say what will be permitted in 10 or 20 years?
I’m sure that people who have jumped ship to embrace pro-homosexual marriage have not thought through the consequences of their decisions, especially young people who are almost always in an affirming mood. The day will come when they will have children, and there won’t be a thing they will be able to do to stop predators from taking advantage of their children because “it will be against the law to discriminate.”
In a Saturday column DeMar called homosexuality a “grave evil” and a “bad moral choice,” and went on to compare supporting a gay son to helping a son who is a pedophile, drug dealer, murderer or slave-owner.
Are there no longer any moral standards? If Senator Rob Portman’s son wants to live and love another man, no one’s stopping him. But to overthrow the moral order of the universe by having the State sanction homosexuality is a grave evil.
No one is denied love. I love all kinds of people, but it’s a moral evil to believe that love necessitates sexual relations. Once you go down this road, there’s no way to stop.
Would Senator Rob Portman throw his support behind pedophilia if he had learned that his son was a pedophile? There are young pedophiles out there. Would he support adultery if his son was an adulterer? Would he support slavery if he found out that one of his relatives was a slave owner and argued persuasively that owning slaves was legitimate? Would the Senator Rob Portman support his son if he learned that he was selling drugs to children? Would he support contract killing if he learned that his son was a contract killer for the mob?
Senator Rob Portman’s son has made a bad moral choice. There is no need to compound that bad moral choice by capitulating to it and softening the moral barriers for young men and women who are struggling with their sexuality and helping to pass laws that will affect millions of people.
As parents, we set standards for our children to live by. When our children rebelled against those standards when they were growing up with us, there were supposed to be consequences. It did not matter how our children felt when they did something wrong. Beating up the neighbor kid because “I felt like it” or “I couldn’t help myself” were not proper moral responses.