This afternoon activists from PFAW and ally groups participated in a petition delivery at the White House calling on President Obama to issue an executive order requiring corporations that receive government contracts to disclose their political spending. More than 550,000 petition signatures were delivered in support of this executive order, collected by a collaborative effort of more than 50 organizations.
In addition to leaders from organized labor, civil rights, environmental and consumer protection groups, PFAW Director of Outreach and Public Engagement Diallo Brooks (pictured below), was one of the individuals to speak at the event. Highlighting the fact that transparency is essential to accountability, Mr. Brooks and other speakers reiterated the strong message sent by the half a million petition signers.
President Obama has shared his support for reform on numerous occasions. Most recently, in his State of the Union address this January, the president called attention to the issue by speaking out against “dark money for ads that pull us into the gutter.” Obama went on to call for a “better politics.”
Rallies like the one held in Washington today also occurred in nearly 60 cities across 28 states, all encouraging the president to use his authority and issue an executive order to help bring about that “better politics.”
Have you added your name to the petition yet?
Today, April 2nd, marks the one year anniversary of the Supreme Court decision, McCutcheon v. FEC. The Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision to remove limits on the total amount of spending an individual could contribute over a two year period to a federal level candidates, parties, or political action committees. Previously, the law limited the amount of money an individual could spend to $48,600 for individual candidates or $74,600 to a party or political action committee over a biannual period. The plaintiff in the case, Shaun McCutcheon, claimed that the limit on political spending was a violation of his First Amendment right to freedom of speech. Using a severely cramped definition of the type of corruption that campaign finance limitations can legitimately address, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote “Congress may target only a specific type of corruption—‘quid pro quo’ corruption . . . Spending large sums of money in connection with elections, but not in connection with an effort to control the exercise of an officeholder’s official duties, does not give rise to quid pro quo corruption. Nor does the possibility that an individual who spends large sums may garner ‘influence over or access to’ elected officials or political parties”. The court, agreeing with McCutcheon, said that having limits on aggregate spending and campaign contributions was unconstitutional and a violation of the First Amendment.
The impact the McCutcheon v. FEC decision had on the 2014 elections was enormous. There was no longer an aggregate restriction on the amount of money an individual could give to candidates, parties and political committees. One of the biggest impacts of the court’s decision was the expansion of joint fundraising committees as fundraising tools. Joint committees are committees where candidates can combine their separate committees, party committees, and PAC’s into one single committee that fundraises together. As a result, nearly four billion dollars was given to candidates, parties, and political action committees combined, the most money ever spent in any midterm election. In 2014, out of the ten Senate races where the most money was spent on candidates, six of them finished within a ten point margin of victory, while in the ten House races where the most money was spent on candidates in 2014, seven of them ended within a five point margin of victory.
The McCutcheon decision has solidified the need for a constitutional amendment because big donors can now give virtually unrestricted amounts of money to influence elections. This money is used to produce television ads for or against candidates, send out direct mail attacking opponents, and to boost a candidate’s own credentials. Such dependence on campaign cash results in our elected officials becoming further beholden to the big donors interests instead of their constituents.
Fortunately, a nonpartisan movement is growing to get big money out of politics and overturn Supreme Court decisions like McCutcheonand Citizens United. Sixteen states, over 600 towns and cities, and over five million people have already gone on the record in support of a constitutional amendment that levels the political playing field and reduce the influence big money in our political system.
Ted Nugent was just getting started in his Saturday address to the Republican Party of Maricopa County, Arizona, when he blamed veterans’ suicides on President Obama.
Nugent suggested that people shoot immigrants who illegally cross the southern border, fondly recalling a time he threatened to shoot a trespasser on his property.
The National Rifle Association board member then went after protesters who used the “hands up, don’t shoot” slogan, calling it “bullshit,” before he saluted “the other black guy here tonight, we appreciate it.”
“Let’s not just win, let’s crush the enemy,” he said, before saying of Nancy Pelosi: “Bitch ain’t in jail yet?” Nugent added that he and Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio — who introduced him at the event — should arrest former IRS official Lois Lerner and declared that whoever thought the U.S. compound in Benghazi “had adequate security is the devil.”
“Any person, any so-called human being that could designate the Fort Hood terrorist attack as ‘workplace violence’ should be shackled and put in a cage,” Nugent said. “The Democrats are insane.”
Nugent said he would not run for elected office, even though he claimed tens of millions of people are begging him to run for president, since he is too busy representing “We The People,” boasting: “Ever notice that Democrats won’t debate me anymore because I chew up their family tree and shit sawdust?”
Later, Nugent said the GOP should be more aggressive and finally put Hillary Clinton in jail.
In an interview with Dana Loesch on Tuesday, Sen. Ted Cruz praised Indiana’s new “religious liberty” law, which goes even further than similar measures in other states to allow businesses to discriminate against customers in providing services.
Deliberately obfuscating the history of the bipartisan federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which was skewed by the Supreme Court in its Hobby Lobby decision, Cruz claimed that Democrats have recently “decided that religious liberty is disposable, that it is unnecessary” and “accordingly, we have a vilification of people who are engaging in acting out their faith.”
Cruz declared that a “partisan leftist group” is now “demonizing the state of Indiana for acting to protect religious liberty there.”
Harkening back to the Pilgrims, who he said (inaccurately) wanted “a land where every one of us could seek out the Lord God Almighty free of government getting in the way,” Cruz said that “we really have gone through the proverbial looking glass that there is now a concerted effort targeting people of faith.”
Laws preventing businesses from discriminating against LGBT people in public services or requiring them to offer full health care coverage for female employees, he implied, are as much as an infringement on religious liberty as forcing a rabbi to eat pork.
“Nobody in their right mind would force a Catholic priest to perform a Protestant wedding. Likewise, nobody in their right mind would force a Jewish rabbi to perform a Christian wedding or, for that matter, to violate kosher and go consume pork,” he said. “We have long had a tradition from the beginning of this country of respecting religious liberty and accommodating and respecting the good-faith religious views of our citizens.”
“And it is only the intolerance of the current day of the far-left that views with which they disagree — the far-left is such a radical proponent of gay marriage that anyone whose faith teaches to the contrary, anyone whose faith teaches that marriage is a sacrament of one man and one woman, a holy union before God, the far-left views that religious view as unacceptable and they’re trying to use the machinery of the law to crush those religious views. And I think it is wrong, I think it is intolerant, and I think it is entirely inconsistent with who we are as a people,” he added.
Ted Nugent spoke at the Lincoln Day Dinner of the Republican Party of Maricopa County, Arizona, last weekend, where he was introduced by the notorious Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
He told the crowd that military veterans are committing suicide because of President Obama: “Here’s your job, Republican Party. Twenty to 25 of those guys kill themselves every day, and they haven’t told you why and they haven’t told anybody else why but they told me why: because the commander-in-chief is the enemy.”
Mike Farris, the Religious Right activist who leads Patrick Henry College and the Home School Legal Defense Association, appeared on “The Lars Larson Show” on Tuesday to defend Indiana’s new “religious freedom” law. Farris dedicated most of the interview to claiming — falsely — that Indiana’s law is no different from other versions of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act passed on the federal level and in other states.
“We are going backwards on religious liberty, back to the Dark Ages of toleration, back to the witch trials, back to the very kinds of things that caused people to get in their ships and cross the ocean and come to the shores of Virginia and Massachusetts,” Farris said, rather ironically.
“This is not just about gay rights,” Farris continued. “This is about, can New York City pass a law that prohibits circumcision, will Orthodox Jews be prohibited from circumcising their little boys? Will pro-life doctors be forced to participate in abortions?”
If gay rights undermine religious freedom, he warned, then America will transform into Nazi Germany: “This is all about unilateral coercion, it’s political correctness with the regimentation and force that Nazi Germany would be proud of.”
In an interview with WorldNetDaily yesterday, anti-gay legal activist Mat Staver once again compared gay rights advocates to terrorists, telling WND radio host Greg Corombos that the LGBT community won’t stop until it wins a “special, protected, preferred status for homosexuality” and “then if they get that, boy are they going to come and hammer you hard with it.”
“Their agenda doesn’t stop until they are completely dominating anybody who ultimately does not not only agree but promote and affirm their lifestyle,” Staver said. “Their agenda will not stop, it will ultimately result in fines and prosecution. This is an intolerant agenda.”
He went on to liken gay rights supporters to the Hamas terrorists who control the Gaza Strip: "This is like dealing with terrorists, negotiating with people who have a zero-sum game and they don’t want you to exist. It is like the Palestinians and the Israelis: the Palestinians in Gaza don’t like the Jews to exist in the land, so no matter how much land you give them for so-called peace, it doesn’t really satisfy them. There is no satisfying this radical agenda, they don’t want you to exist. If you do exist, they want you to promote and applaud their sinful lifestyle.”
Mike Huckabee appeared on the Family Research Council’s “Washington Watch” program yesterday to share his outrage that Walmart, among other businesses, came out against a right-to-discriminate bill that was passed by the state legislature in his home state of Arkansas. Huckabee told FRC president Tony Perkins, the host of the program, that the gay community has turned the controversies surrounding “religious freedom” legislation in Arkansas and Indiana into a “phony crisis.”
“It’s been manufactured by the left, just as was the war on women,” Huckabee said. “There was no war on women. The left has gotten very good on creating a crisis, something to divide the country, something to create this sense in which ‘we’ve got to go after these conservatives because they are trying to trample over our rights.’”
He added that the LGBT rights movement is like something out of George Orwell’s dystopian novel “1984”: “It is a classic example of — really a page out of ‘1984,’ when what things mean are the opposite of what they really are. And that’s what I’m seeing here is that in the name of tolerance, there’s intolerance. In the name of diversity, there’s uniformity. In the name of acceptance, there’s true discrimination.”
Perkins contended that gay people who are denied service by a business should simply try to find another shop that will serve them rather than filing a lawsuit against discriminatory business owners. “Where will it stop?” he asked Huckabee.
“It won’t stop until there are no more churches, until there are no more people who are spreading the Gospel,” Huckabee replied, “and I’m talking now about the unabridged, unapologetic Gospel that is really God’s truth.”
Later in the program, Huckabee insisted that unlike the gay community, conservative Christians would never boycott a business like Walmart. Perkins, however, interjected that he does, in fact, plan to boycott Walmart since the company is “taking a stand against religious freedom.”
Huckabee then backtracked slightly, claiming that “it may come to the place where there will be a day in which Christians have had enough of this — I don’t think they have yet, I still see too many of them folding — but there may come a day in which they realize how close they are to losing all of their freedoms. And maybe there will be a day in which every one of the believers of this nation, people of faith and even some people who aren’t necessarily Christian but they’re people of conscience and they’re people of fairness, and they’ll just say that we will have a national boycott of the following businesses, and let’s just see if they really feel that they are taking the right position.”
Anti-gay pastor Scott Lively writes in BarbWire today that criticism of Indiana’s “religious freedom” law represents just the latest example of how “the LGBT Borg” (a reference to an alien race from Star Trek) acts “like a swarm of hornets” to “either assimilate or destroy whatever person or entity has been foolish enough to challenge” the gay rights movement.
The reason many Indiana businesses have announced their opposition to the new law, Lively says, is a result of a push by closeted gay men who are married to women — “the perfect ‘secret agents’ for their own cause” — to convince companies to join a pro-gay “American Marxist collective.”
“So, America, is resistance to the LGBT Borg futile?” Lively asks. “Marxist regimes have been overthrown before. (And even Jon-Luc Picard eventually defeated his Borg opponents). I guess the outcome of this battle depends on how much we the not-yet-assimilated want to avoid becoming mindless slaves to the Collective.”
“Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.” That was the message of the Borg to Captain Jon-Luc [sic] Picard of the Starship Enterprise on the television series Star Trek: Next Generation. The Borg was a conglomerate of species forcibly transformed into cybernetic drones controlled by a hive mind called the Collective. The Borg grew ever stronger by appropriating and exploiting the assets of whatever new species it encountered as it roamed the universe in pursuit of its insatiable lust for power over the lives of others. Both individual and corporate victims of the Borg were assimilated into the Collective, losing their identity to the hive mind.
This week, the State of Indiana met the Borg, which on planet earth is spelled LGBT. Like Captain Picard, the Governor of Indiana, Mike Pence, has attempted to reason with Borg and learned that there is no compromise with the Collective. “Resistance is futile” said Borg drone Tim Cook, the formerly human representative of the now-Collectivist entity Apple Computers. The refrain was echoed by a chorus of other drones, including some from the newly Borg-acquired National Collegiate Athletic Association.
Interestingly, the Star Trek Borg used a system involving microscopic nanobots to assimilate their prey but the LGBT Borg use media-driven fear-inducing psychological tactics instead (which is exceptionally effective on politicians). Governor Pence and the Republican Party of Indiana are, of course, being subjected to the assimilation process as we speak.
No existing member of the American Marxist collective is allowed to dissent from the view that homosexuality and related perversions are deserving of legal protection and cultural celebration. Moreover, any dissent from outside the Collective attracts the entire body of Borg-like drones — like a swarm of hornets — in the single-minded quest to seek and either assimilate or destroy whatever person or entity has been foolish enough to challenge it.
Many Americans are surprised that major companies like Apple, Ebay, PayPal, and Angie’s List are leading the charge against Indiana on behalf of the homosexual movement. They are shocked that government entities like the State of Connecticut have banned all state-funded travel there. Wake up, America! That’s just how the LGBT Borg operates and it‘s getting stronger with every conquest.
Remember, first of all, that there no objective criteria for determining whether someone is “gay” — it’s purely a matter of self-declaration, thus so-called “closeted” homosexual activists can be the perfect “secret agents” for their own cause just by keeping their sexual proclivities hidden from their employers and co-workers. Many go so far as to marry the opposite-sex to protect themselves from suspicion. This is such a common phenomenon among homosexual men that there is even a name for the women they use for cover: “Beards.”
So, America, is resistance to the LGBT Borg futile? Marxist regimes have been overthrown before. (And even Jon-Luc [sic] Picard eventually defeated his Borg opponents). I guess the outcome of this battle depends on how much we the not-yet-assimilated want to avoid becoming mindless slaves to the Collective.
Today on “The 700 Club,” Pat Robertson repeated his criticism of the gay community in the wake of the controversy surrounding a new Indiana law which gives businesses the right to deny service to LGBT customers, among others.
Robertson dismissed the concerns of the owners of an Indiana pizzeria who feared that they would have to serve pizza at a same-sex couples’ wedding, saying that the business owners “might as well keep their mouth shut” since it was “the cake-makers that are having the problem.”
This led Robertson to a tirade about how gay people will force others to embrace anal sex and bestiality.
“It doesn’t matter what custom you’ve got, it doesn’t matter what holy thing that you worship and adore, the gays are going to get it,” Robertson said. “They’re going to make you conform to them. You are going to say you like anal sex, you like oral sex, you like bestiality, you like anything you can think of, whatever it is. And sooner or later you are going to have to conform your religious beliefs the group of some aberrant thing. It won’t stop at homosexuality.”
Robertson said that polygamy and “sex with animals” will “come next” as a result of the gay rights movement: “They’re going to be saying, ‘You’re intolerant, you’re intolerant, you’re trying to mitigate against these nice people who like dogs, what’s wrong with you?’” He then ranted about temporary marriages in Iran, which he claimed are a key component of Islam. (In reality, the majority of Muslims reject such temporary marriages, which only find support within the Twelver branch of Shia Islam).
On Monday, right-wing talk show host Michael Savage blamed President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder for the recent shooting of a Boston police officer, demanding that Obama and Holder, along with Al Sharpton and New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, apologize to the victim. The perpetrator, who had a long history of violence, seriously injured a police officer during a traffic stop, shooting him in the face and neck.
“Because of Al Sharpton, Barack Obama and Eric Holder, and their war on police, especially white police, their constant harping on police, telling them that they’re racist, they’re no good, they’re no good, they’re no good, ‘black lives matter,’ ‘hands up, don’t shoot,’ because of their constant attacks on the police by de Blasio, Obama, Sharpton, as a result of that the cops approached the car that they had pulled over in Roxbury, Massachusetts, without guns drawn,” Savage said. “Now, in the past, the cops would have approached with their guns drawn, but because of Obama and Holder and Sharpton and de Blasio, the cops approached the car without guns drawn.”
Of course, there is nothing to suggest that the president, attorney general or mayor of a different city ordered cops to approach cars in a traffic stop without drawing their weapons, but Savage said that Obama must nevertheless send an apology to the victim.
The right-wing Media Research Center is downright livid that ABC is working with Dan Savage on a semi-autobiographical sitcom, issuing a petition and letter demanding that the network terminate the project. While this is the same group whose president warned that any criticism of reality TV star Phil Robertson amounted to fascism and was an attack on freedom, the group now says that ABC must stop associating “with the hate language of this uncivil figure.”
MRC’s Dan Gainor appeared on “The Janet Mefferd Show” yesterday, where he especially took issue with Savage’s recent joke that if Ben Carson thinks being gay is a choice, then he can prove “how a man can choose to be gay” by performing a sex act.
Gainor and Mefferd said that such comments, among others, are so outrageous that any person who was involved in the It Gets Better Project, which focuses on combating the mistreatment of LGBT youth, should be ashamed.
“A lot of people will know Dan Savage from the It Gets Better campaign and the videos that they gathered and all this; this was fully supported by the Obama administration, so when you get to the point in culture when you have the White House actually getting involved and endorsing something done by somebody like this, it really is telling, it is quite amazing I think,” Mefferd said, while Gainor called Savage “one of the biggest hypocrites the earth has ever seen.”
Gainor added: “If your kids go to public school, they are being taught It Gets Better, so they are being taught that this guy is normal and a viable person to listen to when, in fact, if you’re one of those groups, conservative, Christian, Republican, something, he hates you and wants you dead.”
Echoing a statement he made two years ago, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins wrote in his daily email to his group’s members yesterday that the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and the supposed persecution of Christians in the U.S. military are draining “morality” from the armed forces and leading to an epidemic of sexual assaults and suicide,.
Perkins also blasted Defense Secretary Ash Carter for a plan to ease some recruitment standards for service members, including accepting people with minor criminal records such as drug offenses for some positions. “In the U.S. military, it might soon be criminals in -- Christians out!” he warns.
Reports have shown that the military is facing difficulties in finding recruits due to a number of factors, including a stronger economy, high obesity rates and college dropout rates. But Perkins suggests that the military would solve its recruiting woes if it simply ended progress toward LGBT rights and brought back “morality.”
“Our troops are tired of fighting two wars: America's and the culture's,” he writes.
Perkins has previously blamed military sexual assaults on the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and warned that it would damage recruiting efforts to the extent that proponents of the repeal would have the “blood of young Marines on their hands.”
In the U.S. military, it might soon be criminals in -- Christians out! That's the Pentagon's solution to the latest recruitment woes, according to Defense Secretary Ash Carter. Faced with low enlistments, the military is desperately looking for ways to attract new service members to replenish its ranks. With morale at a record low and the crackdown on values at an all-time high, recruiters have an even more challenging job these days.
Desperate for new sign-ups, Carter and others are advocating looser standards, including allowing some with minor criminal records to enlist. Blaming the numbers on the "competitive job market," Carter said the military is going to "have to work harder to compete." But the issue isn't so much a competitive job market as it is an unfriendly military. With the wars winding down, it should be even easier to meet those enlistment targets. Instead, the Pentagon is lowering the standards to meet their quotas, which will only accelerate the downward spiral of the military.
While the Left will throw a fit, the reality is no one should be surprised. In fact, FRC's General Boykin and other military experts warned this would be the result of the Obama administration's social experimentation with the military. In the wake of the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," the same doors that opened for homosexuals seemed to shut in Christians' faces, as the President's hostility toward men and women of faith seeped into every aspect of military life. In more evidence that the President's policies have fundamentally transformed America,chaplains have been ousted,Bibles expelled, crosses torn down, and rainbow flags hoisted in their place.
In the absence of morality, sexual assaults have skyrocketed, suicides are through the roof, and religious liberty has vanished. Our troops are tired of fighting two wars: America's and the culture's. Congress needs to get to the bottom of these problems and fast. It's time to undo the damage done by almost seven years of social engineering on our country's finest -- or face the national security consequences.
In an interview yesterday, Liberty Counsel chairman Mat Staver said that a potential fix to Indiana’s new “religious freedom” law ensuring that it would not effectively legalize discrimination would be “devastating,” comparing such a move to negotiating with terrorists.
“There is nothing to clarify and there is nothing to fix,” Staver told Jim Schneider on VCY America’s “Crosstalk.”
“This is what the homosexual lobby wants to do: they want to intimidate [Indiana Gov. Mike Pence] so much, they want to try to embarrass him into doing something that is absolutely foolish, that will promote their agenda,” Staver added.
“It’s kind of like with these terrorists, it’s hard to negotiate with terrorists because they have a zero-sum game. It’s hard to negotiate with these people who simply are irrational and are inventing things that just simply don’t exist. You’re not going to placate them by trying to come back and pass a clarification to a law that doesn’t need any clarification at all.”
Staver told host Jim Schneider that gay rights advocates are promoting “anti-Christian hatred,” warning that the gay rights movement has “given a tolerance message, and what is behind that is, frankly, demonic. It wants to literally overpower, it has no interest in protecting religious freedom, it wants to crush it.”
“This is the wakeup call for the church,” he said.
Staver said that conservative Christians in America are in the same place as Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a Lutheran pastor in Germany who died as a result of his opposition to Nazi rule.
The gay rights movement, Staver said, is all about “absolute intolerant bigotry, hatred towards Christians and people of faith,” and even the “criminalization of Christianity.”
“They want to literally crush religion, the free exercise of religion, and freedom,” Staver said. “That’s what this agenda is about. So I say stand your ground. This is a Bonhoeffer moment and Gov. Mike Pence better not back up on this issue.”
Conservative columnist John Zmirak, who serves as senior editor of televangelist James Robison’s new outlet The Stream, writes today that “the hate that has been spewed at the state of Indiana in the past week” will lead to bloodshed and violence akin to the genocidal campaigns targeting Tutsis in Rwanda and Armenians in Turkey.
He writes that gay marriage supporters are bent on vilifying all Christians to the point that society turns against them, which will “tear up the civil peace in this country, forcing millions of Americans to choose between church and state.”
“If Indiana caves and guts its religious freedom law — as Gov. Mike Pence has already promised — it will prove an equal triumph for those who are so enraged at Christian teaching that they are willing to persecute Christians,” Zmirak writes. “Should we engage in large-scale, non-violent civil disobedience, as black Americans once did in the face of Jim Crow laws? We have the numbers to bring this country to a sudden screeching halt, if we can stand up to the media’s blows and spitting.”
Sample the hate that has been spewed at the state of Indiana in the past week, and faithful Christians in recent years, by gay activists and their allies. We are “bigots,” “Neanderthals” and “haters,” whose views must be ritually rejected by anyone hoping to keep a job in today’s America — even in a Catholic high school. Where will this end? Is there a logical stopping point for this aggression, where Christians are left in peace?
History teaches that mass vilification rarely stops short of spilling blood. The French Jacobins who spent the 1780s slandering the clergy in pornographic pamphlets went on in the 1790s to slaughter Christians by the hundreds of thousands. The Turks paved the way for killing a million Armenian Christians with a wave of propaganda. The Bolsheviks followed their “anti-God” crusade of the 1920s with starvation camps and firing squads. The Communist governments of Eastern Europe obeyed the same script, as scholar Anne Applebaum documents in her sobering study The Iron Curtain. The Hutu government of Rwanda prepared for its assault on the once-powerful Tutsis by incessantly describing them as “cockroaches” on radio broadcasts, which triggered a genocide.
If the media, the law and our elite institutions succeed in lumping Christian sexual morals in with white racism, how long will it be before believing Catholics, Protestants, Orthodox (and many religious minorities) find themselves labelled as members of “extremist sects,” no more to be trusted with the care of their own children than the Branch Davidians were?
It’s stunning how quickly the demands of gay activists went from libertarian (“Don’t arrest us for sodomy”) to totalitarian (“Take part in our weddings or we’ll destroy your livelihoods.”)
If Indiana caves and guts its religious freedom law — as Gov. Mike Pence has already promised — it will prove an equal triumph for those who are so enraged at Christian teaching that they are willing to persecute Christians.
If these zealots succeed, they will tear up the civil peace in this country, forcing millions of Americans to choose between church and state. If laws or government policies beggar Christian businesses, close Christian colleges and schools and force faithful Christians into third-class citizenship — making us virtual dhimmis, like the Christian Copts in Egypt — what should we do? What should be our response now that we know what they want to do, and are overplaying their hand, but before they complete their coup d’etat?
Should we engage in large-scale, non-violent civil disobedience, as black Americans once did in the face of Jim Crow laws? We have the numbers to bring this country to a sudden screeching halt, if we can stand up to the media’s blows and spitting. Those who resist these unjust laws will be treated with all the violence and contempt that was poured out on the pro-life Operation Rescue in the 1980s and ’90s. Local cops from West Hartford, Connecticut, to Los Angeles, California, brutalized teenagers, old women, even nuns and pregnant mothers.
Warning that the legalization of same-sex marriage will somehow jeopardize the survival of humankind, Alan Keyes writes today that states like Indiana are right to pass laws which could discriminate against gay and lesbian couples.
Keyes writes in a column at BarbWire that the purpose of marriage is “to perpetuate the human species” since it is “sourced in the authority of the Creator, and therefore antecedent to any and all humanly constructed rights.”
“Given that same sex couplings are, as such, barren,” he adds, they therefore do not have the right to marry: “For if made into a law for all, over time the concrete material manifestation of humanity would cease to exist.”
“This large-scale extinction of humanity now seems to be an acceptable goal for some elements of what I call the elitist faction,” Keyes said. “For the sake of the earth, of ecology, of environmental balance and purity, they seem to have conceived a righteous hatred against the existence of the human species, and therefore against its procreation.”
In recent years, some judges and justices in the U.S. judicial branch have construed the Constitution so as to fabricate so-called “homosexual marriage rights”. In doing so they have supported the demand that same sex couplings and those of people of different sexes be held in the same regard under the law, and be treated the same when it comes to the legal institution of marriage. When regarded strictly in term of the activities of individuals, this may appear plausible to some people. But as an artifact of just sovereign power, the law cannot be exclusively concerned with individuals when it deals with matters that affect the very nature of humanity itself. In that respect, is there a more obviously natural common good than the perpetuation of humanity as such?
There can be no dispute about the fact that, before some judges and justices in the U.S. judiciary launched their insurrection against their will, the people of the United States defined marriage in terms of the natural common good. They respected, in principle, that institution’s special (i.e., of or related to the species) purpose in relation to the survival of the human race. In this respect, marriage exactly corresponds to an activity that is existentially inseparable from the very nature of humanity, in the most common and concrete sense of the term. Thus understood, marriage is self-evidently an unalienable right, sourced in the authority of the Creator, and therefore antecedent to any and all humanly constructed rights, whatever they may be.
The organic law of the United States acknowledges the authority of the Creator as the primordial and highest authority for the exercise of rights, which is to say, for the lawful permission to do what it is right to do. Right is not sourced in human will, but in the will of the Creator. It is, as President Lincoln put it, “right, as God gives us to see the right.” Unless we mean to deny that it is right, in principle, to perpetuate the human species the right of marriage, defined in terms of that purpose, cannot be denied or disparaged by merely human laws and judgments, including the Constitution of the United States.
The Constitution’s Ninth Amendment simply acknowledges, in a general way, what the unalienable right of marriage makes manifest in a concrete and specific way. The judges and justices who assert and demand enforcement of “marriage equality” for same sex couplings therefore face the burden of proving that, like the marriage couplings of men with women, same sex couplings are essential to the concrete perpetuation of the species as a whole. Given that same sex couplings are, as such, barren, this burden appears, on the face of it, impossible to sustain; and of course the U.S. courts have not done so.
No amount of reasoning as to the subjective gratification individuals derive from the spiritual, emotional or physical aspect of same sex couplings is relevant to this burden of proof. It has to do with humanity as a concrete fact, not as a subjective abstraction. This explains the general prejudice of mankind against the institutionalization of such couplings. For if made into a law for all, over time the concrete material manifestation of humanity would cease to exist.
This large-scale extinction of humanity now seems to be an acceptable goal for some elements of what I call the elitist faction. For the sake of the earth, of ecology, of environmental balance and purity, they seem to have conceived a righteous hatred against the existence of the human species, and therefore against its procreation. This may seem right according to their will. But the standard of right on which lawfulness depends, according to the declaration and ordinance by which the people of the United States constitute a nation, is God’s will, not theirs.
Televangelist Pat Robertson scolded President Obama today for his new plan to cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in order to fight climate change, telling viewers of “The 700 Club” that Obama is a “rogue president” who is subverting the Constitution.
“He says, ‘I am a Messiah, I am a leader, I am anointed, I’m gifted and I’m going to make my way on climate change, I’m going to make my way on immigration, I’m going to make my way on nuclear negotiations, I’m going to make my way on all of the other things that the Republicans and the majority of the people don’t want because I am gifted, I am the Messiah,’” Robertson said. “We should haven’t a leader like that.”
Robertson lamented that Obama is dividing the country and “ripping the framework of America” apart in front of “the eyes of everybody.”