In our current political landscape, moneyed interests frequently use their financial leverage to impact policy. For instance, Wall Street banks lobbied against a bill introduced by Sen. Elizabeth Warren that would help relieve students of their loan debt. For every dollar the fossil fuels industry spends on lobbying, it receives $103 in government subsidies. Now in New Hampshire, special interests are looking to change the state’s longstanding fiscal policy in their favor.
New Hampshire Representative Timothy Smith credits the state’s ability to stay afloat financially without imposing a sales or income tax with its substantial business taxes, which bring in sizable amounts of revenue. However, that might change with the introduction of a bill by 13 Republican senators that would significantly lower the business tax, creating a hole of $90 million in the budget. Rep. Smith connected the introduction of this legislation to the fact that special interest groups, many of which would benefit from this change, spent over $900 thousand in New Hampshire’s legislative elections last year.
Not surprisingly, New Hampshire residents are unhappy with the growing trend of big money influencing politics. Over two-thirds of the state’s voters believe that a constitutional amendment that would overturn decisions like Citizens United should be implemented. Sixty-nine state localities have passed resolutions calling for such an amendment, and over 120 small businesses are hosting Stamp Stampede stations, where patrons can stamp phrases like “not to be used for bribing politicians” on their bills.
Rep. Smith co-sponsored a bill that called for an amendment to get big money out of politics, which passed in the New Hampshire House with bipartisan support. In addition, New Hampshire Governor Maggie Hassan dismissed the business tax reductions as “unpaid for tax cuts to big corporations” that would “put corporate special interest ahead of New Hampshire's families.” Officials in the state government are listening to their constituents’ concerns about the harmful effects of big money in politics.
“Our constituents are trying to tell us something. They’re tired of their government serving lobbyists rather than citizens,” said Rep. Smith.
Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, said yesterday that he would support impeaching Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan over their participation in the Supreme Court’s marriage equality case whenever “the public is ready” for such proceedings.
King, a guest on Iowa talk radio host Jan Mickelson’s program, took a call from a listener who said of the justices who voted to strike down same-sex marriage bans, “I submit that these are rogue justices and they can be impeached and removed by Congress.”
King told the caller that he agreed with him, but “impeachment itself,, we have learned throughout history, is a political decision” and the timing is “up to the will of the people.”
“That provision does exist, and let’s hear what the public has to say,” he added. “If that were put up before me today, and I think I mentioned Ginsburg and Kagan as being two that had been conducting same-sex marriages on their spare time and did not recuse themselves, I would put up the vote to remove them from office. And I’d like to see that case heard again and it would come down four-to-three and it in the end it would come back to the states for that decision, where it should be. But I don’t know if the public is ready for that.”
But in the near term, King said, the nation must turn to “nationwide civil disobedience” in defiance of the marriage decision. He also repeated his plan for states to “abolish civil marriage” in order to deny the benefits and responsibilities of marriage to gay and lesbian couples.
“By doing so we can avoid the litigation that’s coming at every one of our churches,” he said, claiming that gay rights advocates “will not stop until they can force a priest to conduct a same-sex marriage at the altar of a Catholic church.”
Earlier in the program, King went on a long tangent linking the U.S. Constitution not only to the Magna Carta and to Greek and Roman law, but also to the New Testament.
“You can go piece by piece of this all the way through the history of the foundation of western civilization to get to the underpinnings of the pillars of American exceptionalism,” he said. “And we seem to have forgotten about those underpinnings and now we’re at this place where there is no right and wrong and the rule of tyranny of whoever can get leverage in whatever form and five justices in the Supreme Court setting a policy that turns over thousands of years of human experience.”
“This Constitution is rendered an artifact of history if we let this stand,” he warned.
For the last few months, we have been reporting on the film “Light Wins,” a bizarre anti-gay “documentary” featuring Republican presidential candidates Rand Paul and Mike Huckabee, several GOP congressmen and dozens of Religious Right activists.
The film’s creator and star, right-wing conspiracy theorist Janet Porter, also decided to include in her film Theodore Shoebat, a viciously anti-gay activist whom she filmed asking bakeries to make a cake for inscribed with anti-gay messages.
Get rid of the fag flag and burn it into oblivion!
Today, many love to say that if people are indulging in what they want to do, “and as long as they are not hurting anyone and doing it in the privacy of their own homes,” then they are completely fine with it, no matter how evil or deviant. This is especially true when it comes to any debate over homosexuality, or disordered beliefs. They hold that no law should be made against the acts, even though they are a danger to society, because they consider it a private pleasure.
Many claiming Christians will express their support for the sodomites, and they many times will bring up the “love of Christ” to vindicate their support for them. Let us remind such people that no where [sic] in Scripture is evil tolerated simply because it does not physically or directly harm someone, or because it is private. In fact, Christianity is so much against allowing private deviancy, that it says that those who “approve of those who practice them” are “worthy of death” (Romans 1:32).
This means that opinions expressed in favor for homosexuality and other deviancies (such as cannibalism), are worthy of capital punishment. This purely illustrates that Christianity is so much against the license to do evil — even if it is done in private — that it prohibits any approval of it. For those who disapprove, let them read the words of St. Isidore where he said that law “is composed of no private advantage, but for the common benefit of the citizens.” (Isidore, Etymologiae, 5.21, in Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Ia IIae 90, article 2) Let them read St. Thomas where he says that “Law must therefore attend especially to the ordering of things toward blessedness.” (Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Ia IIae 90, article 2)
And so the natural affections are to be upheld, protected, and honored by the state, and anything that comes against it, let it be uprooted and cut off like cancer, for such is against the common good. Let the woman who “exchanged the natural use for what is against nature” and the man who left “the natural use of the woman,” (Romans 1:26-27) “be put to death.” (Leviticus 20:13)
Homosexuality needs to be treated as sedition against the people. What is a people? A people, as St. Augustine defines one, is not to mean “any indiscriminate multitude, but an assembly of those united by agreement as to what is right and by a common interest.” Therefore, sedition is not just against the government itself, but against the collective and common morals and precepts by which a community is united. As St. Thomas says, “sedition is opposed to justice and the common good.” (Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, IIa IIae 64, article 2)
Since homosexuality is against the sacrament of marriage, which is the building block of society, then it is against the common good, and the very Faith of our civilization, and thus is an enemy to the Christian people and should be treated as sedition. Let the heretics who believe in such license read where St. Paul refers to these sodomites as “deserving of death,” and also those who “approve of those who practice them” (Romans 1:32), and let them dare say that homosexuality should be allowed in a Christian society.
This is why the sodomites must be rooted out, for such is what God commands, and failure to do so leads only to spiritual, and then ultimately, to societal anarchy.
Notice how people frequently say that such and such a perversion is not done by everyone. They use the minority participation in a crime to somehow make the warning against it benign. A small step is a great fall, and a little leaven spoils the whole batch; if we allow such wickedness to be done in incriminates, then they will soon be done in great numbers. Crush the eggs of the baby serpents before they hatch. The sodomite, the atheist, the fanatic feminist, the Muslim — all such must be deemed as criminals and enemies to civilization, for they war against the Faith, promote death and hate life.
They should be told to leave their wicked ways under coercion, and if that does not work, then death and strong suppression is the only solution. We cannot allow someone the freedom to do evil, for this will only increase the presence of darkness in the society, and it will become an internal enemy.
On Tuesday’s edition of “Trunews,” End Times broadcaster Rick Wiles delivered a eulogy for America and lamented that “the America I knew and loved is dead, rest in peace. It will not be resurrected.” Wiles cited the Supreme Court’s decision to legalize marriage equality as the cause of our nation’s untimely death, calling the ruling “the final abomination.”
“How can I pledge allegiance to the flag of a nation that celebrates sexual perversion, pornography and baby killing?” Wiles asked. He later added that he is "embarrassed to be a legal citizen in a nation that is openly promoting sexual perversion and compelling other nations to rebel against God too.”
According to Wiles, the death of America has ushered in a new era for the country: the era of Babylon. He criticized the “Babylonian pagans”— which is what he now calls American citizens — for rejecting the Lord’s presence and even chastised his evangelical peers, declaring, “Christians who are acting like nothing seriously happened last Friday are like people sitting on a fiery sofa in a burning house.”
Wiles, who will no longer say the pledge of allegiance or the phrase “God Bless America,” warned listeners that “there is no end to the sexual perversion this country has now opened itself to, the floodgates to sexual perversion – lewdness, sorcery, witchcraft and rebellion – opened wide last Friday.”
He also cited a Russian MP who claimed that the U.S. will “use military might and intimidation” to force other countries to accept same-sex marriage and spread its “gay delirium.”
The fire and brimstone tribute to America ended with Wiles’ assertion that “the final abomination” was upon us, which Wiles said was a reference to a dream Pastor T.D. Hale had in 2005. In his dream, Wiles said, Hale saw an American Eagle shot down in the Oval Office, with a voice saying “Weep in the house, for the misery that shall come shortly.”
Hale envisioned a smirking President Obama, dressed in all black, stepping out from behind his desk and twisting off the Eagle’s head.
“His chest cavity was open,” Wiles narrated, “The heart was exceedingly evil with thick black smoke swirling around Obama’s heart.” Obama then picked up a gavel and a voice overhead gravely proclaimed “The final abomination.”
Mat Staver, the founder and chairman of the anti-gay legal group Liberty Counsel, joined Jim Schneider on VCY America on Monday to discuss the potential repercussions of marriage equality.
Staver’s immediate response to the ruling was that “it’s brought judgment on America.” Repeatedly affirming that he does not consider the “five lawyers” who wrote the decision to be “justices of the United States Supreme Court, although that’s their technical title,” Staver described the ruling as “an opinion of five people that have thrown away millennia of human history, and literally brought judgment upon themselves and, frankly, I think, the nation if the nation accepts what they have done.”
Staver urged conservative Christians to engage in "peaceful resistance” to the Supreme Court’s ruling. Likening the fight against marriage equality to the fight for racial equality, Staver said, “This is the Rosa Parks on the bus. If they tell you to go to the back of the bus because your skin color doesn’t match what they want, don’t go to the back of the bus. This is the time for peaceful resistance, and this is the time to stand with people who are engaged in peaceful resistance.”
“This is the time like of the Nazi Germany when they’d knock on your door,” Staver continued. “‘Is there a Jew in your house?’ Well, if you say 'yes,' than the Jew is dead; if you say 'no,' then you’re dead. What are you gonna do? You gonna protect the person? Or are you gonna save your own skin?”
Responding to Schneider’s fears about the future of public education, Staver argued that we will now witness “the marching of the kids through the public schools and the indoctrination. This is the, this is going to be an assault on them of unprecedented proportions as well.” The Department of Education, he predicted, will soon be ordering schools to tell kindergartners, “‘Hey, you need to experiment as a kindergarten with whether you’re male or female. You need to, like, have some experiments and go out and have same-sex relationships.”
After a caller expressed concern that schoolchildren will be brainwashed into homosexuality, Schneider lamented that even children “growing up in great Christian homes” are beginning to question the immorality of homosexuality because of “what they’re being taught in the schools.”
Staver agreed, urging listeners to “abandon the public schools” because “ this is gonna be a flood of homosexual indoctrination, gender abolition indoctrination, sexual practice experimentation, risky behavior. All this is gonna come on them like a flood.” If you don’t shield your kids from the flood of equality, Staver concluded, “you’re gonna lose your children.”
The right-wing response to the Supreme Court’s marriage equality decision has been, quite literally, apocalyptic.
It’s only been five days since the court issued its ruling, but conservative pundits have already predicted that gay marriage will ultimately be responsible for natural disasters, terrorist attacks and the destruction of freedom.
While there haven’t been any terrorist attacks against the U.S. since the court’s ruling, whenever there are, anti-LGBT activists will know who to blame: gay people who want to get married.
“They have thumbed their nose at God’s design for man, a man and a woman designed from the beginning of time and creation, and it will not, it will not stand,” she added. “While we’re under such terrible terror threats, you know, our protections have been lifted and that’s what they don’t understand.”
Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, also warned that “God’s hand of protection will be withdrawn as future actions from external and internal forces will soon make clear. I will do all I can to prevent such harm, but I am gravely fearful that the stage has now been set.”
“America’s elite leadership have taken the side of the enemies of God, and He will take notice,” WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah warned, claiming that such divine judgment “could come in the form of an attack on our country from foreign power or terrorist group.”
Rick Wiles, host of the End Times radio program “Trunews,” similarly predicted that God will now “lift His hand of protection from this nation” and “permit America’s enemies to attack this nation.”
Cliff Kincaid of the conservative group Accuracy in Media was a little more tame in his reasoning but came to the same conclusion: “A country that descends to the bottom of the barrel morally and culturally will not be able to defend itself against its foreign adversaries and enemies. Indeed, we have the evidence all around us that, as the culture has degenerated, our ability to defend ourselves has simultaneously been weakened.”
2)Forced gay sex
The right-wing warnings of “forced homosexuality” are now coming true, at least according to one pastor. Tim Brooks of the Christian Ministries Church told one conservative radio program that gay people, just like the men of Sodom who tried to rape angelic visitors, “are trying to force their lifestyle on him, come out and have sex with us, have to participate.”
Record-breaking floods have inundated Washington, D.C. just days after the Supreme Court decided they knew better than God. I seem to remember another time in history when there was a record-breaking flood.
God painted the sky with rainbow colors after that flood. This go-around - Obama painted the White House with rainbow colors.
Anybody got an ark?
Heavy rain may not be the only result of same-sex marriage (besides equal marriage rights for gay people), as some Religious Right pundits also believe that divine wrath will come in the form of food shortages and drought.
Wiles warned that “God will cut off America’s food supply and this nation will be hit with disease, pestilence, drought, natural calamities and a great shaking.”
“Nothing grabs the attention of the distracted faster than the complete removal of all creature comforts and extravagant wealth,” Christian Post columnist Michael Bresciani said. “Crops will fail, stores will close and commerce will come almost to a complete stop. It will not be pretty. Add to that, attacks from our enemies and natural disasters rising to meet the pride of the sinners’ right where it hurts the most.”
Five years ago, Religious Right leaders confidently predicted that prison cells and court rooms would fill up with pastors after the passage of the 2009 Hate Crimes Act. Of course, such events never occurred, but now the same anti-LGBT activists are making the samefalseclaims about the supposed consequences of same-sex marriage.
“Pastors who refuse to perform gay marriage and preach from the Bible should prepare for hate crime charges,” Starnes said. “All dissent will be silenced.”
Richard Land, a former leader of the Southern Baptist Convention’s political arm, was a little more cautious, explaining that pastors will indeed face prison if they refuse to officiate same-sex couple’s weddings, but only after the government takes a few “intermediate steps.”
Just days prior to the Supreme Court’s marriage ruling, Glenn Beck said that if the court were to decide in favor of same-sex couples, then the Bible would be outlawed as a “hate book.” Just hours after the decision came down, Beck offered another dire warning: He will lose his show.
“This could mean the end of radio broadcasts like mine,” Beck said, insisting that he will be taken off the air simply because he is “for traditional marriage.”
7)Taking kids from their parents
Chicago-based pastor Erwin Lutzer believes that parents who oppose same-sex marriage may lose custody of their children following the Supreme Court’s marriage ruling, predicting that “parents that homeschool children, religious parents, will be diagnosed as culturally intolerant and personality intolerant. And therefore, as a result, their children will be taken away from them.”
Rios, the AFA official, even warned that children may be forced to spy on their parents like in the Soviet Union.
8)This means war
Conservative legal activist Larry Klayman denounced the marriage equality ruling as a “harbinger to revolution,” urging Americans to take to rebellion like the Founding Fathers did.
“If evil despots have compromised even our Supreme Court, the ultimate protector and ‘decider’ of our rights, then what choice is left to us?” Klayman asked. “John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin certainly know, from their own experience with King George, and from their graves they see what now again lies ahead and what must be done to restore freedom to our shores.”
One conservative pundit, Bill Muehlenberg, told readers that “a major proper response for Christians and others” to the Supreme Court’s ruling “is massive civil disobedience and defiance of this homo-fascist decision.”
9)Pedophilia now legal
Former House GOP Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who promised that “all hell is going to break loose” if the Supreme Court decided to strike down state bans on same-sex marriage, declared that he has uncovered a “secret memo” from the Department of Justice that reveals plans to legalize “having sex with little boys,” along with bestiality and polygamy.
The website run by West, the former congressman, even claimed that pedophilia supporters celebrated the Friday ruling. As the myth-busting website Snopes notes, the blog post on West’s site was “lifted almost entirely from an article published in 2011 and in no way reflected a claim prompted by a June 2015 Supreme Court decision regarding same-sex marriage.” They add that the 2011 story “originated with a writer who has been asserting for years (less than accurately) that the push for gay rights is manifestly setting the stage for legalized ‘pedophilia rights.’”
Perhaps the blog post’s author received this news from David Barton, the right-wing pseudo-historian who just days before the court issued its ruling alleged, falsely, that pedophilia became “legally protected” following the passage of the 2009 Hate Crimes Act.
10)Criminalization of Christianity
The most prominent claim coming from the Religious Right in response to the Supreme Court’s decision has been what Family Research Council President Tony Perkins has called the government attempt to “eliminate” religious beliefs that oppose gay rights.
“In one appalling decision, the Supreme Court has effectively opened the door to the criminalization of Christianity when it comes to the marriage issue ... and not just Christianity, but every major religion that supports God’s model for marriage and family,” warned Penny Nance of Concerned Women for America.
Right-wing pundit Matt Barber made a similar claim: “The goal of ‘LGBT’ activists and secular progressives has long been to pit the government directly against the free exercise of religion – Christianity in particular – and to silence all dissent.”
One FRC official, Craig James, said that conservatives who oppose the same-sex marriage decision should respond to the coming persecution and ridicule “in love” … just like the families of the Charleston massacre.
On Sunday, Fox News pundit Todd Starnes addressed the First Baptist Church of Texarkana with his usual shtick about the supposed anti-Christian persecution in America, but this time added in a few more battle cries as he called on churches to resist gay marriage.
Starnes kicked off his speech by repeating his claim that the Supreme Court’s marriage equality decision is likely responsible for storms and floods in Washington, D.C. which occurred the day after the ruling.
“I am here to tell you that as of Friday, we are on the verge of having our faith criminalized,” Starnes said. “Rick Warren told me that this will be the civil rights issue of our generation.”
After going on a tangent about how the “national media loved” Miley Cyrus’s performance at the 2013 MTV Video Music Awards and now “Washington, D.C., is twerking on all of us,” Starnes predicted that pastors could soon be turned into lawbreakers as a result of the “Supreme Court’s decision to redefine marriage.”
He even tied the court’s decision to efforts to remove the Confederate flag: “If you think the cultural purging of the southern states in recent days has been breathtaking, wait until you see what they are about to unleash on the people like here gathered at the First Baptist Church in Texarkana…. Pastors who refuse to perform gay marriages and actually preach the Word of God should prepare for hate crime charges. All dissent will be silenced by the government and by the activists.”
Alabama has been center stage of the gay marriage fight since Moore, with the backing of fellow Republicans, used his position as chief justice of the state’s supreme court to order public officials to defy a federal court decision striking down the state’s ban on same-sex marriage.
Beeker, the public service commissioner, kicked things off by calling the Supreme Court’s decision “an assault on God” and on “our Christian heritage” that rendered the 10th Amendment “null and void.”
“A runaway judiciary,” he continued, “is a bigger threat to the United States than ISIS. Liberal judges have done more harm to our country and our Constitution than Al Qaeda."
Not to be outdone, Sanctity of Marriage Alabama spokesman Tom Ford, who called marriage equality part of a “war against God” and a “new invention” the results of which “no one knows.”
But he had some guesses. “The best indication that I have of what it will bring is what we’ve seen in the Bible,” he said. “I can go to Soddom and Gomorrah. In history, we can go to Pompeii, we can go to other places, we can look at Nero in the time of Rome. And in these times God brought destruction, and he also raised up people to speak his truth and he also drew people to himself. And this is our hope.”
He also warned of the dire consequences on children: “If we give our children to the sodomites to educate, when it’s all said and done and they believe that sodomy is okay, why are we surprised?”
Baptist street preacher Tommy Littleton sounded a similar alarm, saying “the human rights issue of our era” is “protecting our children from what is nothing short of gay liberation theology, full sexual liberation.”
“Today we live in probably the most challenging time of our generation, of our nation’s history,” he said, warning of an impending “climate of fear, loss of free speech, loss of religious freedom, and the overwhelming tsunami that is coming against us and our families and our churches and our children.”
After arguing that curriculum standards like Common Core indoctrinate children in homosexuality, he urged the “normal majority” to “rise up and say I don’t want my children to be educated by people who are confused about their own sexuality.”
“Are we really in an honest conversation on the other side or are the LGBT people being used for a much greater and horrendous agenda?” he asked. “I believe they are.”
Becky Gerritson, head of the Wetumpka Tea Party, cited an unfounded right-wing rumor about Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wanting to lower the age of consent to 12 years old to warn that the court’s decision paves the way for adult-child marriage and plural marriage.
She urged the audience to “have compassion” on “future victims of this decision” who will be trapped in plural marriages and all the “horrors that it will play out in their lives.”
Eidsmoe, who works for Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore’s Foundation for Moral Law, hinted at future challenges to the Supreme Court ruling, saying “this is far from over” and referring to legislators and probate judges who are ready to “obey God rather than man.”
The Supreme Court’s decision, he said, “constitutes an illegitimate means of reaching and unconstitutional decision to create an invalid institution to further the perpetration of immoral acts.”
On Monday, Houston-based radio show host Sam Malone criticized the Supreme Court’s ruling on marriage equality, lambasting the court along with the “extremists of the gay agenda.” These activists, he said, “are anti-tolerance and not one of them has come out to say respect the religious views of the 98 percent of America who aren’t gay.”
Malone’s guest, Texas GOP activist Jared Woodfill, similarly warned that the gay community is “coming after us,” reminding conservatives that “it’s a war that we’re in right now.”
“The gay activists refuse to preach tolerance,” Malone said. “It’s like dealing with Muslim terrorists, there is no tolerance. If 0.08 percent of the population are gay men, that’s 0.08 percent, who is going to stand up for the 98 percent who aren’t and are religious and have a firm foundation in the Bible and say, ‘This is wrong, I don’t want to be involved, you do it, if that’s your thing, you do it, ain’t my thing and I don’t want anything to do with it.’ Obama launched the war on religion in America.”
Malone’s other guest, conservative blogger Stacy Washington, said that the court ruled the way it did on marriage equality because Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan are secretly gay. She also suggested that Chief Justice John Roberts, who wrote a dissenting opinion, is also gay.
“Elena Kagan and Sotomayor, they’re both homosexuals, they were all over those ones they felt like they could influence, and they got Roberts because he’s got something going on, he’s got something going on there,” she said.
Malone predicted that Kagan “will come out in a month or so,” claiming that her secret homosexuality made it a “filthy ruling.”
Voters Are Concerned About the Influence of Big Money in 2016
Last week the Wall Street Journal and NBC published the results of a poll on various issues leading up to the 2016 presidential elections, showing that the influence of wealthy donors on elections is a growing concern among Americans.
Thirty-three percent of those surveyed say that the influence of wealthy donors is their biggest concern in the 2016 presidential race. Although the majority were Democrats, big money in politics was the issue with the most agreement between the two parties, only a seventeen percent gap separated Democrats and Republicans. The poll suggests that the influence of the wealthy is becoming less of a partisan issue, and more of a general anxiety for Americans when it comes to elections.
“the influence of wealthy donors was the primary concern for independents.”
This can and should influence the positions of the 2016 candidates as they seek to win over swing voters. Whether the growing anxiety amongst Americans about big money in politics will lead to changes in campaign finance remains uncertain, but the heightened awareness may bring the issue to the forefront of the 2016 race.
The head of Alabama’s court system, an employee of notoriously anti-gay Chief Justice Roy Moore, has sent a letter to Gov. Robert Bentley and other state elected officials urging them to defy the Supreme Court’s marriage equality ruling or else “become complicit in the takeover by the wicked,” reports AL.com.
“Public officials are ministers of God assigned the duty of punishing the wicked and protecting the righteous,” Win Johnson, director of legal staff at the state’s Administrative Office of the Court, wrote to the elected officials in a letter obtained by the newspaper. “If the public officials decide to officially approve of the acts of the wicked, they must logically not protect the righteous from the wicked. In fact, they must become protectors of the wicked. You cannot serve two masters; you must pick – God or Satan.”
He continues with a defense of criminal prohibitions on homosexuality: “The criminal laws against homosexual sodomy are for the protection of the righteous, particularly the young, the weak, the vulnerable, who need the law to teach them right from wrong when in a vulnerable state. The U.S. Supreme Court, although it claims to have done so in 2003, cannot take something that God calls a crime and declare it not a crime.”
He then equates compliance with the marriage equality ruling with obedience in Nazi Germany, writing “the civil government must now become a persecuting power; you cannot avoid it.”
Time for Public Officials to take their stand one way or the other
Jesus Christ is Lord of all. He came to save the world by His death and resurrection. That world includes you, me, the family, the civil government, all the institutions of life. He came to advance His Father's kingdom, not watch man run rampant upon the earth as if Christ had never come. As if it were the days of Noah!
Public officials are ministers of God assigned the duty of punishing the wicked and protecting the righteous. If the public officials decide to officially approve of the acts of the wicked, they must logically not protect the righteous from the wicked. In fact, they must become protectors of the wicked. You cannot serve two masters; you must pick – God or Satan.
The criminal laws against homosexual sodomy are for the protection of the righteous, particularly the young, the weak, the vulnerable, who need the law to teach them right from wrong when in a vulnerable state. The U.S. Supreme Court, although it claims to have done so in 2003, cannot take something that God calls a crime and declare it not a crime.
We're facing something even worse now, the civil government taking a new step and actually requiring the approval and sanctifying by the state of an evil behavior. Five justices on the U.S. Supreme Court have now opined that the States of this country and all of us must approve of so-called marriages of same sex couples.
Therefore, the civil government must now become a persecuting power; you cannot avoid it. The civil government must protect what it approves of. It must protect the advocates' employment, their business dealings, their lives in every way. Against whom? Against those who think their lifestyle is evil. That's you and me, bible-believing Christians, the Church, etc.
Public official, what will you do? Will you stand up for the law of Alabama, for the people, for the weak and vulnerable, for the law of God? Or will you capitulate? Will you become complicit in the takeover by the wicked?
"I must follow the law," you say. Law? What law? There is no law anymore, there's just opinion. One day this, one day that. When the law becomes merely the opinion of a handful of people on the courts, there is no longer any law. There is tyranny. There is chaos. But there is no law.
The young and the weak, those that are caused to stumble by courts that approve of what is evil, are those whom Jesus referred to when he said, "It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." Luke 17:2. You don't want to be complicit in allowing such stumbling blocks.
Don't use the Nazi war-crimes trial defense: "My superiors (or the courts) told me to do it." You're not standing for the rule of law when you capitulate to a law that defies God and exposes people to the wicked. You're just a coward making excuses!
Or will your conscience cause you to resign? Why would you leave the people of this State, their children, your children and grandchildren to the wolves, those who would rend the society apart with their denial of what's good and evil?
Your duty is to stand against the ravages of a superior authority that would go beyond its rightful power and force upon the people something evil. That's what the founders of our country did when Parliament exceeded its powers. That's what the Puritans in civil government in the 1600's did when the King exceeded his powers.
On Judgment Day, you won't stand in front of the media, the advocates of "Equality," or even the federal courts; you'll stand before the King of Kings, the Judge and Ruler over the Kings of the Earth, Jesus Christ. His law is not subject to the vote of man, and He, asthe good and loving author of that law, does not exempt any nation from it. The law's author, speaking of Himself as "the stone which the builders rejected," said, "Whosoever shall fall upon that stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder." Luke 20:18.
What can you do? You have authority as an elected official. You also are sworn to uphold the U.S. Constitution and Alabama Constitution. Find a way to do so. Don't acquiesce to the takeover (actually the takedown)! Use your authority and every legal angle to oppose the tyrants! If necessary, just say, "No." It is not rebellion for you to say, "Your interpretation of the Constitution is wrong, beyond your authority, and detrimental to this nation." In fact, it's your duty. You're not opposing the rule of law, you're upholding it by saying that.
Far-right pundit Ann Coulter joined Eric Metaxas on his radio show last Friday to discuss her new anti-immigrant book, “Adios, America! The Left’s Plan to Turn Our Country into a Third World Hellhole.”
Metaxas tied anti-immigrant politics to the idea of American exceptionalism, saying that that “in order for America to fulfill its mission to the world, we’re supposed to bless the world. This country has been a blessing to all the countries that are not America, from practically day one.”
“We won’t be anymore,” retorted Coulter.
“That’s the point,” continued Metaxas. “Because if you care about people who are not in America…then you must let America be America” instead of “undermining America’s ability to be America.”
Super-patriot Coulter agreed and added: “It won’t be America, it’ll be Mexico. And will Mexico go rushing in when there’s an earthquake in Haiti? Will they be sending out more foreign aid than any other nation? No they won’t.”
Metaxas reasoned that Americans, especially Christians, are “supposed to love everybody. But loving people doesn’t mean telling them what they’re doing is okay. In fact, usually loving somebody will involve saying something that the person maybe doesn’t wanna hear.”
“It’s also not loving people to be dumping these misogynistic alien cultures on the country that are going to end up, um, raping young American girls,” Coulter responded. “Is that loving the young American girls?” Especially when it is being done “without warning, and, and without our consent.”
So it came as no surprise that Huckabee released this image today on his Facebook page declaring that “an attack on Christians and their religious liberty is a hate crime that must be prosecuted.”
He also vowed to use executive orders to stop “discrimination” against entities that oppose same-sex marriage and pledged to “direct the U.S. Attorney General to prosecute as hate crimes groups or individuals who discriminated or attacked individuals, businesses, religious organizations and others for their religious beliefs about marriage.”
Of course, hate crimes motivated by religion are by federal hate crimes laws, laws which Huckabee has criticized as discriminatory. He justified his opposition to hate crime laws by alleging that they enable the government to “start regulating what people can think.”
More telling is Huckabee’s claim that an “attack” on “religious liberty is a hate crime,” since Huckabee believes that nearly anything he personally finds offensive is an attack on religious liberty, whether it be measures giving LGBT people equal protection under the law or commonsense regulations of insurance plans.
Huckabee even viewed the entire Chick-fil-A saga as an attack on religious liberty, as he described in this bizarre anti-gay film:
Rep. Glenn Grothman, Republican of Wisconsin, joined Milwaukee-area radio host Vicki McKenna on Friday to discuss the Supreme Court’s ruling striking down state bans on same-sex marriage. Grothman told McKenna that the Supreme Court’s reasoning, which was based on the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, was an affront to the Americans who died in the Civil War because it was “a strong religious war to further a Christian lifestyle by getting rid of slavery.”
“Our president during the Civil War was, of course, Abraham Lincoln, who was known as the most biblical of presidents, somebody who quoted the Bible a lot,” he said. "In the Civil War, some 600,000 people died in a country that was much less populated than that today. And it was a much more religious country and I think a lot of people who died fighting in that war felt they died fighting for a religious cause, you know, ‘Battle Hymn of the Republic’ and all that.
“I think it would shock those people who died in that war to find out the constitutional amendment which was ratified kind of as a culmination of their great efforts and their great deaths would be 150 years later, a little less than 150 years later, used by these five robed, arrogant, robed people to take this constitutional amendment and say that that constitutional amendment that was drafted after the Civil War was in fact an amendment designed to say that same-sex marriage had to be legal.”
He added that the decision is “particularly offensive” given that the 14th Amendment was “drafted by a people who felt they had just engaged in a strong religious war to further a Christian lifestyle by getting rid of slavery.”
Phyllis Schlafly is none too pleased with the Supreme Court’s decision striking down state gay marriage bans, and has a modest proposal for Congress: Pass a resolution affirming the “dignity of opposite-sex married couples,” especially that of couples where “a provider-husband is the principal breadwinner and his wife is dedicated to the job of homemaker.”
While this resolution might not change much in the short term, the anti-feminist crusader writes in her syndicated column today, it might act as an inspiration to the anti-gay movement as they continue to fight marriage equality.
Justice Kennedy's opinion for a 5-4 majority of the Supreme Court has rightly been condemned for its lack of grounding in the constitutional text he is sworn to uphold. Unable to find gay marriage in either the due process clause or the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, Kennedy ultimately rests his case on what Justice Clarence Thomas sarcastically called the "dignity clause" of the Constitution.
There is no such clause, of course, although Kennedy's majority opinion mentioned "dignity" nine times. But if dignity can be conferred by decisions of the Supreme Court, then Congress can do so, too.
Therein lies a first response: Congress should formally recognize the dignity of opposite-sex married couples and resolve to protect that dignity in our laws. A joint resolution should recite the many reasons why the special union of husband and wife has been honored for "millennia," as Kennedy admitted.
A crash program to rebuild the traditional American nuclear family is urgently necessary for continuing our nation's political and economic success in this century. This won't happen if we transform marriage into a means of giving "dignity" to mostly childless homosexuals.
Once Congress is on a roll to confer dignity, it should confer an extra measure of dignity on the single-earner family, where a provider-husband is the principal breadwinner and his wife is dedicated to the job of homemaker, a role more socially beneficial than working in the paid labor force.
After reciting the foregoing reasons and many others, Congress should conclude its resolution by formally resolving that the traditional family, founded on a married husband and wife, carries special dignity and deserves special recognition because it provides unique benefits to society.
This is not to deny that every human person has value and dignity, or that other domestic relationships may have some value in limited circumstances. But Congress should respond to Kennedy with a ringing affirmation of the unique dignity that should be accorded to society's foundational unit: the marriage of husband and wife.
Naysayers will scoff that the foregoing resolution doesn't change the Supreme Court decision, and you can imagine a late-night comedian comparing it to the medal of courage the Wizard of Oz presented to the Cowardly Lion. But movie fans will recall how that gesture inspired Dorothy and her companions toward achieving their goal.
In a discussion yesterday on American Family Radio’s “Sandy Rios in the Morning,” Rios and anti-gay pastor Erwin Lutzer warned that marriage equality will turn American into the Soviet Union as children in public schools who embrace “sexual confusion” will become informants on their parents who will eventually be carted off by the government.
Lutzer argued that with the rise of gay rights, children are “being indoctrinated in ways” equivalent to “Russia of years ago.” Because of this, “parents need to take that responsibility” to overcome “huge barriers” and “ultimate destruction” as “these children are gonna take their own sexual confusion into their families and into their relationships and it’s just going to exponentially multiply. The challenge is absolutely huge.”
“It is huge,” agreed Rios. The prospect of sexual confusion also reminded Rios of “the old Soviet Union,” where children were “indoctrinated all day at school and then they go home and their parents can only whisper their true beliefs to the kids. And then the kids were asked to tattle, to report their parents if they were teaching anything other than what the state was teaching. And so, parental influence dwindled.” Fearing this Orwellian future for America, Rios warned that after the breakup of the Soviet Union, “the only reason people still knew about God was because their grandmothers had told them about God.”
“We’re going to be at war with our government and with culture around us,” Rios continued, “and our children are going to be so delusional – they already are – in culture that it’s going to create a huge line between us and our children. And it’s gonna be tough, tough.”
Arguing for the need for private schooling and homeschooling, Lutzer claimed public schools “are going to be deliberately so confused on this issue that it would be impossible, really, for a Christian child to go through a school without being infected by the terrible teachings that that child is going to receive.”
Recalling an article he had read years ago, Lutzer discussed the existence of “intolerant personality disorder,” and argued that “it’s not beyond reason to think that the time will come when parents that homeschool children, religious parents, will be diagnosed as culturally intolerant and personality intolerant. And therefore, as a result, their children will be taken away from them.”
Rios thought this was “certainly within the realm of possibility” because “we already know that this has been happening for a long time” with diversity training for corporate employees or, as she called them, “reeducation camps.”
“God is bringing judgement to the nation and ushering about the end of all things, really,” Rios concluded.
American Family Association official Sandy Rios warned on her radio program yesterday that the Obama administration’s decision to light up the White House in rainbow colors in celebration of the Supreme Court’s marriage equality decision was “an unbelievable affront to God” that will have “consequences.” According to Rios, God will lift His hand of protection from America in response to the court’s ruling and the celebratory rainbow images, thereby increasing the threat of terror attacks on the United States.
The rainbow, she said, “was God’s sign to mankind that he would never destroy the earth again by flood,” so if “you take his symbol and you use it for a sign of sexual behavior that is ungodly, unallowed,” it will have “some consequence.”
“My grief is for you, because you don’t understand what you just did. You don’t understand,” she told gay rights activists. “Again, now, to get more practical about this, the terror threat against this nation has gone up exponentially.”
Citing warnings about possible terrorist attacks in America over the July 4th weekend, Rios declared that, to make matters worse, “it is Ramadan.” Unlike Christians, whom Rios claimed understand the true meaning of the word ‘holy,’ Muslims use the holy month of Ramadan to “fast so that [they] can murder people,” she said.
Rios then pivoted to address gay rights activists, telling them that when you “ignore God” you “do away with his protection,” which is “why we fear for the country and we fear for you too.”
Meanwhile, she said, American Christians have “entered a new era” of persecution where they will be “like believers in Iran and Syria” or “first-century Rome, pagan Rome, China most recently, Russia before the breakup of the Soviet Union. We are entering a time of living in a hostile culture.”
“We’re gonna see a lot of things change,” warned Rios, “and those of you that stay strong in your personal convictions, you’re gonna have trouble at work, you may lose your jobs. This is a new era, so it’s not for the faint of heart.”
Religious Right legal activist Michael Farris joined Rios later on the program, telling her that after the marriage decision, “I really feel like I’m a stranger living in a strange land. They’ve stolen America from us, and they’ve stolen our heritage and they’ve stolen everything by a five-to-four vote.”
“I don’t think that’s an overstatement,” responded Rios. “The people that won on Friday don’t understand that they have lost terribly. We’ve lost protections of God for this country. We have thumbed our nose at him using his symbol, the rainbow, which was a personal, sacred symbol that he gave to a sign to earth that he would not destroy it again. They have thumbed their nose a God’s design for man, a man and a woman designed from the beginning of time and creation, and it will not, it will not stand. While we’re under such terrible terror threats, you know, our protections have been lifted and that’s what they don’t understand. And they are in the same boat that we’re in so it’s a — it is a sad day for America.”
Last week on “The Sam Malone Show,” Dan Gainor of the right-wing Media Research Center alleged that the Supreme Court’s ruling to uphold marriage equality is part of a wider government war by liberals to crush all opposition.
“For people who are white, cisgender Christians, they’re coming for you,” Gainor said. “They’re coming for your faith, your family, your freedom, your guns, your free speech.”
Gainor went so far as to compare liberals to Nazis: “Just like the Brownshirts in the 1930s, they are telegraphing their attack, they are telling you what they are going to do, they are telling you how they are going to do it to you and if you are caught off guard when this happens, then you’re a fool.”
Malone agreed with Gainor’s dire assessment, alleging that President Obama is engineering this supposed chaos in a “distractionary” attempt to “take control.”
This post by PFAW and PFAW Foundation Senior Legislative Counsel Paul Gordon was originally published in the Huffington Post.
Ted Cruz, Bobby Jindal, and other conservative leaders have recently lashed out against the Supreme Court's decision on marriage equality by proclaiming that local clerks who don't personally agree with marriage equality should not be required to issue marriage licenses or perform weddings for same-sex couples - even though it's their job to provide that service to the public.
Their logic is fundamentally flawed. Civil marriage is a civil function, not a religious one. Government employees allowing someone to access their legal rights are not doing anything religious, nor are they condoning the actions being licensed any more than with any other type of license.
That's why when government employees in our country have had religious objections to divorce and remarriage, they have still had to do their jobs. And when government employees have had religious objections to interracial marriages, they have still had to do their jobs. So, too, have government officials with other religious objections to whether or how certain couples get married.
But when the particular religious belief in question is opposition to lesbians and gays, that's apparently a different matter altogether. Now, suddenly, we're told that government employees need to have their religious liberty "protected."
A principle of religious liberty that is invoked only in the context of one particular religious belief is no principle at all. It is a pretext.
The far-right movement that is coalescing around these "protections" allowing civil servants to impose their religious beliefs on others and deny them service does not have clean hands in this regard. While they proclaim loudly that they just want to "live and let live," the policies they have pursued vigorously for decades have aggressively sought to prevent LGBT people from having basic human rights. The Right's new clamor for "protections" is just another form of homophobia.
If the religious right simply wanted to "live and let live," they would not have spent these past decades seeking to impose their religious beliefs about homosexuality on others both through custom and through force of law. They would not have boycotted television networks for airing shows portraying LGBT people as ordinary people. Nor would they have screamed bloody murder when popular celebrities came out of the closet. They would not have fought to prevent us from raising children. They would not have battled to ensure that surviving members of couples be denied Social Security survivor benefits. They would not have opposed letting us serve our country in the intelligence services or in the military. They would not have put so much energy into convincing Americans that we are sexual predators going after their children. They would not have tried to bar us from teaching in public schools. They would not have threatened us with criminal prosecution just for our private, consensual sexual conduct.
Whether it's religious refusals specific to marriage, more general Religious Freedom Restoration Acts in a post-Hobby Lobby world, or Sen. Mike Lee's misleadingly named "First Amendment Defense Act," the Right is yet again attacking LGBT people. With a growing number of Americans - and now the Supreme Court - affirming that the right to marry is a right guaranteed to all regardless of sexual orientation, some on the Right have come to understand that their best tactic to fight marriage equality is to couch their homophobic goals with the language of "religious liberty" instead of explicitly speaking out against LGBT rights. But it's up to all of us to make sure that they do not succeed in these efforts to portray themselves as virtuous defenders of religious liberty, because in reality they're just waging another war against LGBT people.