Noted Africana studies professor Ted Nugent claims in a column today that “liberal Democratic slave drivers” have paved the way for “the destruction of black America” and are dishonoring the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
“Show me a social or cultural problem, and I will show you how liberalism either created the problem or exacerbated it,” Nugent writes, adding that the Democrats’ “destructive policies” have created a “destructo-derby” and “caused a cultural and social cancer to metastasize in black America.”
Say what you will, but the destruction of black America is the result of Fedzilla’s $16 trillion and 50-year-old so-called war on poverty, which created a cycle of dependency, destruction and culture rot for black America.
America doesn’t have a “gun violence” problem but rather a “liberal denial” problem whereby liberals support continuing the insanely expensive and totally destructive policies and programs that have caused a cultural and social cancer to metastasize in black America for far too long. Show me a social or cultural problem, and I will show you how liberalism either created the problem or exacerbated it.
It is fascinating to wonder what Dr. King would have said about the culture and social rot that plagues black America today.
To honestly celebrate the legacy of Dr. King, black America would have to admit to the self-inflicted destructo-derby they are waging and begin to tell their liberal Democratic slave drivers to take a hike.
Far-right columnist Erik Rush has come to believe that efforts to impeach and remove President Obama from office are unlikely to succeed, so he is now is calling on “military personnel” to “lend their support to an effort by Congress to remove the president through methods other than impeachment.”
In a WorldNetDaily column today, Rush doesn’t specify the extra-constitutional means he hopes to use to oust Obama, but he does regret that such a move is “less likely than it otherwise might have been given the widespread purge that has taken place within the military.”
Were there members of Congress with the courage to do so, ample evidence and leverage exists to quietly demand the resignation of this president and his Cabinet, indeed, of the vice president as well. Such an event would be quite scandalous, but it pales in comparison to the upheavals that will surely come if those who have studied Alinsky, Lenin and Mao are allowed to further their agenda unchecked.
There is the possibility that certain military personnel might lend their support to an effort by Congress to remove the president through methods other than impeachment, although this is less likely than it otherwise might have been given the widespread purge that has taken place within the military. As reported in WND, retired Maj. Gen. Paul E. Vallely, the chairman of Stand Up America, has been at the forefront of researching tactics that might be used (within the law) to oust the Obama cabal.
Barring such scenarios, there are those who have called for peaceful mass demonstrations demanding the same, as well as the resignations of some of the more corrupt leaders in the House and Senate. Despite the potential for affairs to go awry, I support considering such a plan, because not only would it transmit our willingness to resist the government, but it would provide evidence of that willingness to Americans yet unengaged in the nascent resistance.
In truth, there is nothing wrong with the government per se. It is like unto a vintage automobile with an intoxicated driver at the wheel. It’s just a matter of getting the keys away.
In another round of birthers embracing Ted Cruz, WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah — one of the leading voices of the birther movement — writes today that he has no problem with the Texas senator running for president even though he was born in Canada.
Farah explains that because the “media elite” quashed his conspiracy theory that President Obama is ineligible to be president because he was born in Kenya to an American mother and a Kenyan father, it doesn’t matter that Cruz was born abroad.
Of course, the main difference is that Cruz was actually born in Canada — to an American mother and Cuban father — while Obama was born in the United States.
While Farah has made a career out of insisting that the Constitution requires the president to be born on U.S. soil regardless of the citizenship of his or her parents, apparently this rule doesn’t apply to Tea Party heroes like Ted Cruz…and it’s all the media’s fault.
With all this heavy-duty investigative journalism and newfound faux enthusiasm for the Constitution suddenly on display, it’s obvious the No. 1 fear among the elite media is that Ted Cruz might actually run for president.
They fear him not because he was born in Canada. They fear him not because of any concern for the U.S. Constitution. I will even be more generous to the Cruz smear machine than it was to me when I questioned Obama’s eligibility by rejecting the notion it is because the senator from Texas is Hispanic. They fear him because he is a bold, eloquent, charismatic, principled, committed defender of American liberty.
I have been labeled by the Big Media as “the birther king.”
So if anyone has the right and the duty to weigh in on Ted Cruz’s eligibility, it’s me – even though no one is asking.
My answer is, “I don’t care.”
I don’t care because the Constitution was not written and ratified to be applied to some and not others. If no one cared about Obama’s questionable eligibility, despite his shocking lack of transparency and thin paper trail, then they have no business questioning Ted Cruz – who has released his birth certificate, renounced his Canadian citizenship and upheld every provision of the Constitution to the best of his ability throughout his life.
For the record, I would have preferred if the issue of natural born citizenship were openly debated and discussed before Obama assumed office and began his all-out jihad on the Constitution. I would have preferred if my colleagues in the news media had taken seriously their responsibility to be watchdogs on government and hold all politicians accountable to the rule of law. I would have preferred if the motivations of those of us seeking the truth about Obama’s eligibility status and life story had never been impugned.
Ex-gay activist D.L. Foster appeared on Linda Harvey’s radio show over the weekend where he declared that the United States is no longer the “land of the free” because homosexuality is no longer illegal.
The two spent time criticizing former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for launching a State Department program to advance LGBT equality abroad, or as Foster called it, “U.S.-imported gay imperialism,” while hailing anti-LGBT laws in nations like Jamaica and India, where homosexuality is a criminal offense. Foster called Russia the “crown jewel” of the anti-LGBT movement for its “series of laws that literally enraged the homosexual world.”
“I say three cheers for these nations, these cheers for these countries who recognize something that America, the so-called ‘land of the free and the home of the brave,’ has not recognized: that God’s laws are more important than man’s laws,” Foster added.
Later in the program, Foster said that President Obama and Clinton are “giving away our sovereign power” for “a small minority of people who live their lives based on a lie.”
“I have dedicated my life, I don’t know how long it’s going to be, but I’m dedicated to standing up and fighting and speaking out and doing whatever I can to support real freedom,” Foster said. “A lie always kills, a lie always destroys and it is very unfortunate that so many people have been deceived to follow this lie with the evidence proving that it is as destructive as we have said.”
Lady Theresa Thombs, the Republican candidate for the Texas State Board of Education who rails against evolution, “socialist higher education” and “Devil worshipers,” today shared a Facebook post calling for “Straight Pride.”
When several commenters mocked her post, Thombs responded that she doesn’t hate gay people and only thinks that gay people are sinners, just like murderers: “We are not bigoted or hateful. Jesus said to love the sinner but hate the sin. God gives you free will to do what you want. But murder is a sin, but even a murderer is loved and forgiven if he asked to be. We both have the right to believe the way we choose is all that I am saying.”
In another Facebook post, Thombs said that people who criticized her attack on evolution at a school board candidate forum are actually trying to take away the right of Christians to speak freely and run for public office.
The Texas Freedom Network wondered “who has argued that Christians ‘have no right to seek public office,’” reminding Thombs that almost all of the candidates for the post are Christian.
The appeal to King’s memory is more than a little ironic coming from a group that is tied to white nationalist John Tanton and that just this fall hired a founding member of the new-Confederate group League of the South. CAPS spokesman Joe Guzzardi, who announced in a press release that political leaders have “lost sight of Dr. King’s dream” has written dozens of blog posts for the white nationalist website VDARE .
Religious Right activists often claim that they will never be silent about “Nazi” abortion rights …that is, unless those rights exist in Israel. We noted last week that Israel’s decision to expand public funding for abortion coverage was met with crickets from many American anti-choice groups that also embrace Christian Zionism and accuse President Obama of being unfriendly to Israel.
These organizations, of course, would have erupted with rage if the Obama administration had even contemplated implementing a similar policy.
In a column today, a writer at the conservative Catholic website Aleteia calls out U.S abortion rights opponents for responding to Israel’s new policy “with little comment or condemnation,” wondering if they either “missed the story” or think “abortion in Israel just doesn’t matter.”
Aleteia’s Mark Gordon writes that in order to be consistent, the same anti-choice movement that demands a ban on government funds for abortion coverage and groups like Planned Parenthood in the U.S. should also call for the end of U.S. aid to Israel: “American taxpayers should not be put in the position of underwriting the culture of death. But if that’s true of Obamacare – and it is – then shouldn’t it be true for American foreign aid?”
American pro-life and pro-family groups responded to the December announcement with little comment or condemnation. Lifesitenews.com chose to run an anodyne report on the policy change, but not editorialize. The Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (C-FAM), whose mission is to “defend life and family at international institutions and to publicize the debate,” had nothing to say. The same was true for National Right to Life, Priests for Life, the American Life League and most others.
Dr. Charmaine Yoest, head of Americans United for Life, did note in a statement that “Unborn lives are rich with possibilities and worth saving and government should never be used to harm life and harm women.” The Family Research Council’s Arina Grossu agreed, saying, “No government should invest its money into killing its own citizens.” She also predicted that Israeli government funding would only result in more abortions in that country.” On the other hand, Liberty Counsel, “an international nonprofit litigation, education, and policy organization dedicated to advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of life, and the family,” told its members on January 9, “there has never been a more critical time for you to show your support to Israel and its Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu!” Either someone at Liberty Counsel missed the story or abortion in Israel just doesn’t matter.
Representative Chris Smith (R-NJ), chair of the Congressional Pro-Life Caucus, declined to comment, but perhaps that’s understandable. In addition to his pro-life work, Smith is a charter member of the Israel Allies Foundation (IAF). Formed in 2006, IAF is a kind of institutional link between the US Congress and the Israeli Knesset. Smith, a Catholic, is also the House sponsor of a wonderful bill titled “The Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2013.” The measure is intended introduce much-needed transparency to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. If passed, Smith’s bill would force insurers to notify their insured whether abortion is or isn’t covered, and whether any surcharges or other fees are used to pay for abortions. In presenting his bill, Smith wrote, “Obamacare’s abortion mandate violates federal law and makes taxpayers complicit in the culture of death.”
Smith is right, of course. American taxpayers should not be put in the position of underwriting the culture of death. But if that’s true of Obamacare – and it is – then shouldn’t it be true for American foreign aid? Israel receives about $3 billion each year from American taxpayers. About 74% of that is returned to the United States in the form of contracts with American weapons manufacturers. But given the fungible nature of money, and since Israel would buy weapons with money from its own treasury in the absence of aid, the current arrangement amounts to American funding of Israeli abortions.
Activists fighting to keep a draconian anti-immigrant ordinance in a Nebraska town reportedly have called in the big guns: the Nativist group FAIR.
In 2010, voters in Fremont, Nebraska passed an ordinance barring landlords from renting to undocumented immigrants and requiring employers to check new employee’s immigration status. (The employment provision exempted the town’s largest employers, two meatpacking plants just outside of city limits.) Behind the law was Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who has made a name for himself by peddling anti-immigrant and voter suppression measures to communities across the country.
Last summer, a federal appeals court upheld the law but a city councilmember has introduced a ballot referendum to repeal parts of it. This has angered proponents of the law, who have set up a group called “Our Vote Should Count” and gathered support from the national nativist group FAIR (a former Kobach employer), according to the Fremont Tribune :
Our Vote Should Count enlisted the help of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, the Tea Party Patriots, True The Vote, and other national organizations, including a Washington, D.C.-based analyst and an Omaha media consultant, to put together a media campaign that will use social media, print media, flyers and canvassing to get out their message.
UPDATE: The Fremont Tribune reported that the group True the Vote was involved in the Fremont initiative. True the Vote tells us that they had no involvement in the measure and are seeking a retraction from the Tribune. We have removed True the Vote from our our story.
UPDATE 2: The Fremont Tribune reports that Our Vote Should Count was in contact with local organizers at FAIR and True the Vote, which may not have come to the attention of the national groups:
“In assembling facts and data,” Von Behren replied in an email to the Tribune, “we met individually with representatives of Tea Party Patriots, True The Vote and (the Federation for American Immigration Reform). Each provided varying levels of support, including data access, technical support, data analysis and general knowledge of the issues from their experience. It's correct that the national office of True The Vote may not have known about local conversations. I would expect the same of (Tea Party Patriots) or FAIR.
“The information provided was all publicly available, but much easier to find with help from someone who works in that area. Neither of the other two organizations raised a concern so we assumed that was the normal function of a local representative,” Von Behren wrote.
Supporters of the Fremont ordinance don’t exactly hide that they are motivated by suspicion of the town’s growing Hispanic population – whether documented or not. One Vote Should count shared this graphic on its Facebook page, which warns that “Fremont is a sanctuary city” because its “Hispanic population TRIPLED! in 10 years”:
In November, Harpers author Ted Genoways visited a town meeting about the ordinance and found racial tensions running high, as one woman railed against “Spanish in my schools” and a Latina resident, a third-generation American, recalled a man screaming at her to “go back to Mexico.”
An Our Vote Should Count spokesman, after warning of the increase in the “non-white population” in local schools, told the Fremont Tribune that the real racists were undocumented immigrants:
Enforcing the ordinance is not about targeting a race, he said.
“There are two levels of racism here. One is a set of racists who will use illegal people for their own profit, and that is being done actively. The other racism is people who knowingly break the law to come here for their own profit,” he said.
Larry Klayman claims America is experiencing a revolution against President Obama and his administration…but Americans just don’t know it yet.
Speaking with David Knight of InfoWars yesterday, Klayman said that former defense secretary Robert Gates “called Obama a traitor” who “has been favoring Muslim interests over American servicemen.”
“We’re in a state of revolution, the country is up against the law,” Klayman said. “Unfortunately, most people don’t recognize it yet, but that was true in 1776.”
South Carolina state senator Lee Bright, who is challenging Sen. Lindsey Graham in this year’s Republican primary, suggested to a Tea Party group today that Congress should impeach federal judges who rule in favor of marriage equality in order to intimidate other judges into doing “the right thing.”
Discussing the recent federal ruling legalizing marriage equality in Utah, Bright told Tea Party Express, “Congress ought to stand up and do its job and impeach one of these federal judges. And I think when you do that, being a federal judge is a pretty good gig, and I think if you’ll impeach just one, the rest of them will do the right thing. And they’ll do it out of necessity, because self-preservation is an instinct that so many folks have.”
The Constitution grants lifetime appointments to federal judges “during good behavior.” In the nation’s history, only eight federal judges have been impeached and removed from office by Congress –most for committing crimes or severely neglecting their duties.
Later in the interview, Bright launched into a discourse on the balance between liberty and security, including a rant that we don’t quite understand about how “there are institutions that can put you in a room that you can’t harm yourself but you’re not free, and I would rather take the risk and be free.”
This led him to the topic of gun laws, on which he said the U.S. should follow Israel’s example, including putting “teachers with machine guns on playgrounds.”
"You look over at Israel, and that’s an armed group of folks over there,” he said. “I mean, they are teachers with machine guns on playgrounds, because you got terrorists over there that would choose to harm children and whose teachers are there to protect them. When you’ve got folks that are armed and able to defend themselves, the threat of terrorism goes down drastically.”
In fact, Israel has much stricter gun control laws than the U.S. does and in 1995 mandated guards at the entrances to schools to protect against terrorism. As an Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman put it, “We're fighting terrorism, which comes under very specific geopolitical and military circumstances. This is not something that compares with the situation in the U.S.” Also, we weren’t able to find anything about Israeli teachers walking around playgrounds with machine guns.
The Associated Press is reporting that “dozens of gay men” have been arrested in northern Nigeria as a result of a new law strengthening the country’s prohibition on homosexuality, in what public health groups fear will be a setback to efforts to fight AIDS.
LAGOS, Nigeria (AP) — Police, working off a list of 168 suspects purportedly obtained through torture, are arresting dozens of gay men in Nigeria's northern Bauchi state, human rights activists said Tuesday.
A new law in Nigeria, dubbed the "Jail the Gays" bill, is encouraging the persecution of gays and will endanger programs fighting HIV-AIDS in the gay community, said Dorothy Aken'Ova, executive director of Nigeria's International Center for Reproductive Health and Sexual Rights.
On Monday, President Goodluck Jonathan's office confirmed that the Nigerian leader signed the Same Sex Marriage Prohibition Act that criminalizes gay marriage, gay organizations and anyone working with or promoting them.
CBS notes that “sodomy has been illegal in Nigeria for many years...in some parts of Nigeria’s Muslim-majority north where strict Sharia law is upheld, gays and lesbians risk being stoned to death if they are caught.”
This seems like a good time, then, to look back at the American religious right’s support for Nigeria’s harsh penalties for its LGBT residents and opposition to Obama administration efforts to protect LGBT rights abroad.
In 2011, when then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced that the Obama administration would work to protect LGBT rights abroad – including in places like Nigeria that criminalize homosexuality -- the religious right exploded in anger. Pat Robertson called the policy “appalling” and warned of God’s wrath in response. Radio host Janet Mefferd cited Nigeria’s anti-gay laws in a rant against the Obama administration’s policy, saying “I don’t see that this is something that the United States has to jump in on because it’s such a huge global tragedy. It’s crazy.” The Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute also cited Nigeria’s move to tighten criminal sanctions on homosexuality in its opposition to the Obama administration policy.
We wonder if any of these groups will comment about this wave of arrests.
WASHINGTON – The Senate today confirmed Judge Robert Wilkins to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Wilkins was one of three nominees blocked for months by Senate Republicans. The GOP admitted that they would block any and all of President Obama’s nominees to fill the three vacancies on this critically important court no matter who they were, which provoked the Senate to change its filibuster rules. Wilkins’ fellow nominees Patricia Millett and Nina Pillard were confirmed late last year.
Marge Baker, executive vice president of People For the American Way, responded to the vote:
“Today’s vote sends a supremely qualified and capable nominee to the nation’s second most influential court. It also puts an end to Senate Republicans’ dishonest effort to keep President Obama from filling vacancies on the D.C. Circuit, an effort that was destructive and transparently political.
“Now that the D.C. Circuit’s seats are full, it can get on with its important work for the American people. And just as importantly, if the Senate can put petty partisan fights behind it, it can get on with doing the American people's work as well, including filling the other long-vacant federal court seats across the country.”
As we all know, there is nobody more patriotic than a politician who promotes secession from the United States and backs white nationalist groups.
Take for example Texas Railroad Commission Chairman Barry Smitherman, once boasted to WorldNetDaily that thanks to him, Texas has “made great progress in becoming an independent nation.” Smitherman, now a Republican candidate for state attorney general, has also attacked the Southern Poverty Law Center for labeling as “hate groups” organizations that subscribe to white nationalism and have neo-Nazi ties.
Now, naturally, Smitherman has earned the endorsement of pseudo-historian David Barton: “David Barton, founder of Wallbuilders, has endorsed Barry Smitherman for Texas Attorney General! Stand with David to elect a true conservative to the Office of the Attorney General.”
We won’t hold our breath to see if Barton — who believes that the United States is a divinely inspired nation and that bad stuff started to happen only recently because of the removal of government-sponsored prayer from schools and homosexuality — sees a problem with reconciling his nationalistic views with a politician who talks about turning Texas into “an independent nation.”
Family Research Council president Tony Perkins told Washington Watch listeners last Friday that they should oppose gay equality because it will lead to the end of humanity.
Perkins agreed with a caller who said that gay people should be asked how they could exist “if it were not for physical relationship, intimacy between a man and a woman,” a point which followed a long rant about how President Obama is a Muslim under the influence of the Devil.
The FRC head responded that “the human race would be extinct within time if [homosexuality was] normal.”
Perkins has previously warned that government “promotion of same-sex relations” is part of a “push for population control.” Last month, Liberty Counsel head Mat Staver claimed that if gays and lesbians were allowed to legally marry then “everyone” might start “to go towards same-sex marriage” and society would “simply cease to exist.”
Caller: At the beginning of your show, I suppose it was a rhetorical question about what’s driving this administration. Well, simple explanation. If it’s not of God, it’s of the Devil; and you can certainly tell that the Obama administration is not of God. How can they expect any kind of peace with crazy stuff going on with any kind of certainty of working things out when you have a Muslim leader of a country over here per se trying to work things out between the Jewish people and Muslims and stuff, you know how can they expect it not to go the way they want it to?
One of my things about the gay and lesbian stuff. I have a non-biblical way to try to get the attention would be to ask those people that practice that lifestyle if it were not for physical relationship, intimacy between a man and a woman, how could they exist?
Perkins: Basic biology. You’re absolutely right. That’s why if you think about it, its logical conclusion would be if it were normal it would be extinct, the human race would be extinct within time if it were normal. So you’re right. Biology says the only we exist as human beings is that a man and a woman come together and we procreate. That’s the reason that government has long recognize marriage is because it is the place in which children are born.
The American Principles Project, the Religious Right group that helped torpedo Mary Cheney’s short-lived Senate bid in Wyoming, claims that Republicans can win young and women voters if they campaigned more aggressively on their party platform’s ultraconservative positions on abortion rights and LGBT equality.
The organization issued a report [PDF] last fall which criticizes Republican candidates like Mitt Romney for trying to play down or moderate the GOP’s stances on such social issues. APP’s Maggie Gallagher -- formerly of the National Organization for Marriage -- even chided the far-right Virginia gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli for not being conservative enough.
In an interview today with OneNewsNow, an affiliate of the American Family Association, APP spokeswoman Kate Bryan claims that the GOP’s opposition to choice and gay rights will actually help the party win over women and young voters.
Bryan may want to check out the 2012 election exit poll, which found that 59 percent of voters supported legal abortion, or the many studies that report support for marriage equality reaching record highs.
Spokesperson Kate Bryan of the American Principles Project points out that Mitt Romney had little to say about abortion and homosexuality, and he was defeated by Barack Obama "instead of standing strong on these foundational principles that the majority of Americans stand with."
Bryan insists Republicans were afraid they would lose the votes of women and youth, so they "deflected" on social issues.
"For lack of a better term," she says, "they were cowards."
What about the future?
"I think that they're starting to see the trend and instead of shying away from it, they're really embracing their stance and being a strong voice," says the American Principles spokesperson.
Because of that change, she predicts the GOP will garner more votes from women and from young people.
Family Research Council president Tony Perkins and the group’s senior fellow Cathy Ruse dedicated a segment of Washington Watch on Friday to attacking the Girl Scouts over a Twitter “scandal.” In December, the Girl Scouts tweeted a link to a HuffPost Women article called, “These Incredible Ladies Should Be Women Of The Year For 2013.”
The article included a HuffPost Live video in which panelists mentioned Malala Yousafzai, Beyoncé Knowles and Wendy Davis as their picks for Woman of the Year. The mention of Davis, the Texas state senator and gubernatorial candidate who gained international attention for her filibuster of a bill curtailing abortion rights, infuriated anti-choice activists, who then attacked the Girl Scouts for linking to the post.
Ruse alleged to Perkins that the leadership of the Girl Scouts is encouraging promiscuity and abortion and that the group’s decision to let a transgender girl join a Brownie troop amounted to “child abuse.”
To them abortion and sex-ed and promiscuity for very young girls is a good thing. They just have a very different mindset but they do not share the values of most American parents and the values of most people who are in the Girl Scouts. So when the Girl Scout membership begins to learn about this they find it scandalous. There’s a reason why membership is down in the Girl Scouts, there’s a reason why cookie sales are down, because all of these things are scandalous. You know, Girl Scouts now admit cross-dressing boys as little Brownie girls; it’s child abuse, frankly.
Look at what the organization at the head wants to do with your girls and where it’s taking the organization and then people can decide what they should do. You’ve got a cross-dresser in the front office, you’ve got little boys admitted as little girls and those poor little girls in those troops have to pretend this is a girl? That’s child abuse in some people’s estimation.
Perkins also revived the myth that the Girl Scouts circulated a Planned Parenthood pamphlet at an event in 2010. He argued that Planned Parenthood seeks to “encourage promiscuity and behavior that would lead [Girl Scouts] into Planned Parenthood clinics.”
Perkins: We’re talking about the agenda that’s really behind the Girl Scouts. I guess Cathy I can understand, it makes sense for Planned Parenthood to want to be teamed up with the Girl Scouts because that’s a client base for them if they can get this information into their hands to encourage promiscuity and behavior that would lead them into Planned Parenthood clinics.
Ruse: Absolutely, it’s logical isn’t it.
The Illinois Family Institute, the state affiliate of the American Family Association that led the unsuccessful fight against marriage equality last year, is back to fighting smaller battles, this time attacking the University of Notre Dame for officially recognizing an LGBT group.
In an open letter to Notre Dame president Rev. John Jenkins posted on IFI’s website, the group’s “cultural analyst” Laurie Higgins expresses her “disappointment” that Notre Dame has for the first time recognized a student LGBT group, or as she calls it, “those who affirm homosexual acts and acts related to gender confusion as normative and morally defensible.”
Higgins tells Jenkins that in recognizing its LGBT students, Notre Dame might as well affirm “other sin predispositions” like incest or pedophilia.
She then turns to the eternal consequences of LGBT organizing, warning that openly LGBT students will bring “nothing but temporal and eternal harm” to themselves and their colleagues.
I also want to express my disappointment that Notre Dame has chosen to recognize a “student organization” initiated and shaped by those who affirm homosexual acts and acts related to gender confusion as normative and morally defensible. In permitting an organization that affirms subjective moral propositions that defy Catholic (as well as orthodox Protestant) doctrine, Notre Dame’s distinct Catholic identity has been weakened. Would Notre Dame recognize other “student organizations” initiated by those who affirm other sin predispositions (e.g. polyamory, consensual adult incest, or the “sexual orientation” recently designated “minor-attracted persons”)?
If the Notre Dame-recognized “LGBT” organization had been initiated by those who were committed to helping “LGBT” students live lives that embody Catholic beliefs on sexuality and gender, such an organization would be a service to Notre Dame students. Unfortunately, the central goals of students who affirm a homosexual or “transgender” identity are contrary to Catholic doctrine and as such can bring nothing but temporal and eternal harm—intellectual, emotional, physical, and/or spiritual harm—to “LGBT”-identifying students and the larger Notre Dame community.
Higgins did, however, praise Jenkins for Notre Dame’s challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s contraception coverage mandate.