One of the anti-gay movement’s favorite pieces of ammunition is a 2012 study by University of Texas professor Mark Regnerus purporting to find that the children of gay and lesbian people are more likely to suffer negative outcomes, including drug abuse, poor school performance, and child abuse.
As soon as Regnerus’s “New Family Structures” study was released, fellow social scientists began picking apart Regnerus’s data, pointing out that barely any of the people that he interviewed had actually been raised by same-sex couples and that he failed to control for factors like family instability. Regnerus himself has acknowledged that his study didn’t actually say anything about parenting by stable same-sex couples, but that hasn’t stopped the anti-gay right from using it to bolster its case against marriage equality…and Regnerus from providing testimony in court cases against gay marriage.
This week, the Daily Texan, the newspaper of the University of Texas at Austin, published documents it had obtained from an internal review of Regnerus’s study that found a series of methodological flaws to the research.
The findings were summed up by the dean of UT’s College of Liberal Arts, Randy Diehl, who noted that while the school wouldn't conduct an ethics investigation into Regnerus's work, “no policy implications about same-sex parenting should be drawn from the study”:
The post-tenure review committee met again in January of this year and was tasked by Diehl with considering only methodological problems. Based on this charge, the committee found the following, as summarized and endorsed by Diehl: “Valid methodological concerns have been raised. … A key one is this: Because the design of the study ensured that the parental same-sex relationship variable was confounded with the family structure stability variable, it is not possible to conclude that the different life outcomes between the two groups were caused by the parental relationship variable.” Diehl, citing this finding and Regnerus’ original caution that the article did not deal with same-sex marriage legal rights, agreed that “no policy implications about same-sex parenting should be drawn from the study.” But the fact is Regnerus did use those findings in court.
Specifically, UT’s review found what other critics had noted: that the Regnerus study was not about same-sex parenting, but about family instability. From Diehl’s summary:
- The design of the NFS [New Family Structures] study survey instrument guaranteed that any participant who reported that their parent participated in a same-sex romantic relationship would have also experienced some form of family instability.
-Increased likelihood of negative outcomes for children who experience family instability are well-documented within existing scholarly literature.
Nobody is arguing that it isn’t difficult to find large-scale data about children raised by same-sex parents – even Regnerus has acknowledged some of his study’s shortcomings. But the problem with the Regnerus study is that the anti-gay Right continues to insist it proves a case against marriage equality – no matter how often that interpretation is debunked.
Jennifer LeClaire, the news editor of the Religious Right magazine “Charisma,” appeared on “Trunews” yesterday to tell host Rick Wiles about a recent prophetic experience she had in which God warned her that “a tsunami of perversion and all manner of wicked sin is headed towards this nation.”
Wiles said that this “tsunami” has already hit America: “I believe it’s truly a word from the Lord. ‘A tsunami of perversion and all manner of wicked sin is headed towards this nation.’ We see it right now. The first wave has already come in. The nation is embracing perversion, it is embracing hostility towards God, it is the most bizarre thing I’ve ever witnessed in my life and quite frankly it’s frightening.”
“This very week in Indiana, the governor and the legislative leaders of Indiana are being treated as though they’re worse than Hamas or Hezbollah,” Wiles said. “I’m just amazed to what is happening in this country.”
LeClaire agreed, suggesting that criticism of Indiana is proof that “we’ve opened the door to the Enemy in this land” and that the country is now experiencing “a spiritual attack.”
Wiles predicted that Christians in America will soon “go underground” and “suffer persecution” just like Christians in East Germany: “I believe pastors will be taken away in the middle of the night and be tortured.”
“We’re going to have to live out our Christian faith in the face of severe persecution” he added.
Richard Mack, the former sheriff of Graham County, Arizona, now runs the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, a group that promotes the idea that county sheriffs are the highest law officers in the country and thus have the power to arrest federal officials who are enforcing laws they believe are unconstitutional.
Mack gave an example of this theory in an interview last month with Kerry Lutz on his “Financial Survival Network,” when he said that if he were still sheriff, he would arrest Lois Lerner, the former IRS official who Tea Party groups say targeted them in applications for tax-exempt status, charges that are still being investigated by the FBI.
“If you were still sheriff in Graham County and Lois Lerner paid a visit to your county, would you lock her up?” Lutz asked.
“Well, I would in the sense that I would have to first investigate and prove that she had actually done something to somebody in my county. So, primarily I would conduct a proper investigation and if anyone had been abused, like many that testified before Congress, the Tea Party groups and others that had been abused not only by the IRS, but the IRS had complicity from the FBI,” Mack replied.
“So, if I could prove that they had done that to anybody in my county, if she stopped by, I most definitely would, and hopefully get the support of the county attorney to actually prosecute,” he said.
Mack is currently running for office in another Arizona county, which he hopes to populate with likeminded voters and elected officials, creating his version of a “constitutional” paradise.
James David Manning, the extremist “stone homos” pastor of Harlem’s Atlah Worldwide Church, hosted BarbWire content editor Gina Miller on his program “The Manning Report” earlier this year and kicked off the discussion with this touching rant about the need to show courage by calling gay people “faggots”:
Manning and Miller discussed the supposed connections between Islamic extremism and the gay rights movement, with Manning warning that “while sodomy is making its way like wildfire across America,” Islamic law is becoming “a second court and Constitution in this once great nation.”
“Will we see ourselves under two mandates, sodomy and Sharia?” Manning asked. Miller replied: “I would not doubt it a bit.”
In another segment, Manning predicted that while “we will have to go underground with our faith,” “Almighty God will visit upon the sodomites and their programs such plagues like they have never seen before and the agony that they will experience will be unspeakable.”
After Manning falsely claimed that Mary Cheney, former Vice President Dick Cheney’s daughter, is a transgender man, the pastor cited the Cheney family’s support for LGBT rights as proof that “Satan has really been able to advance this movement.”
“You nailed it,” Miller said. “At the root of this movement — it’s demonic.”
She continued: “The demonic aspect of homosexual behavior and all of these related disorders cannot be overstated, and when the Enemy is unacknowledged he is free to run rampant.”
Miller concluded that the “real targets of this movement” are “Christians, because as you know, in the world, we’ve got the children of the Lord and the children of the Devil, and we’ve got Israel and Christians, that’s it. So Christians are the true targets of this movement. Whether the foot soldiers of this movement know it or not, the demonic forces behind it do.”
Earlier this year, as Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore ordered probate judges in his state to defy a federal court ruling establishing marriage equality in Alabama, Brian reported extensively about Moore’s personal, financial and ideological connections to Michael Peroutka, a Republican county councilman in Maryland who has used his personal fortune to fund extreme Christian nationalist causes.
Peroutka, who until recently was active in the neo-Confederate League of the South and once said that he was “still angry” Maryland didn’t secede from the Union, runs a group called the Institute on the Constitution (IOC), which promotes the view that American laws must reflect a certain interpretation of biblical law.
The IOC teaches that the Constitution requires that public officeholders believe in God; that “the promotion of evolution is an act of disloyalty to America”; that “there is no such thing as a civil right”; and that the Maryland General Assembly is “no longer a valid legislative body” after passing laws, such as marriage equality, that Peroutka believes “violate God’s law.” Peroutka argues that one reason the U.S. has strayed from “God’s law” is because the Union won the “War Between the States.”
Peroutka largely bankrolled Moore’s latest campaign for office and has poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into groups that Moore founded. In return, Moore has spoken at events at Peroutka’s Institute on the Constitution and, last month, appeared in a fundraising video for the group.
Appearing about 2 minutes and 23 seconds into the video, Moore says: “My good friend Michael Anthony Peroutka and the folks at the Institute on the Constitution have developed a course to teach the moral, legal and biblical basis of our Constitution and the principles upon which our nation began. I personally have reviewed this course and found it to be highly instructive, and recommend it.”
The fundraising video also highlights IOC’s “American Clubs,” meant to teach the groups ideology to schoolchildren.
In a wide-ranging interview with CNN’s Poppy Harlow released this week, Warren Buffett had some strong words about Supreme Court decisions like Citizens United that have handed increasing political power to the super-rich. Responding to a question about income inequality, Buffett raised the issue of money in elections:
With Citizens United and other decisions that enable the rich to contribute really unlimited amounts, that actually tilts the balance even more toward the ultra-rich…The unlimited giving to parties, to candidates, really pushes us more toward a plutocracy. They say it’s free speech, but somebody can speak 20 or 30 million times and my cleaning lady can’t speak at all.
Watch the interview clip here:
Americans For Truth About Homosexuality’s Peter LaBarbera stopped by VCY America’s “Crosstalk” program on Wednesday to discuss the debate over legislation in Arkansas and Indiana that would allow businesses to discriminate against LGBT customers in the name of “religious liberty.”
Although both measures still have the potential to license discrimination, each has been softened by lawmakers in the wake of controversy, which LaBarbera and “Crosstalk” host Jim Schneider attributed to the “spirit of Antichrist” in the gay rights movement.
At the end of the program, a listener called in to share her views on the Antichrist. “I believe that there are several Antichrists,” she said, “and I believe one is the gay liberation movement and another Antichrist, I believe, is some parts of the government in Iran that are always talking about destroying Israel.”
“Certainly the spirit of Antichrist is in the movement that is a very assault at how he designed man and woman to be,” Schneider agreed. “Thank you. That is indeed the spirit of Antichrist. And especially when we see the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Peter, the attacks against it, that is a spirit of Antichrist saying that we cannot act upon the convictions that God’s word provides for us.”
LaBarbera responded that this is “absolutely” the case and that there is now an Antichrist-driven situation in the U.S. in which “Christians have to go to the back of the bus.”
Soon afterwards, another listener called in with another biblical question, asking LaBarbera if he ever brings up the story of Sodom and Gomorrah when he’s giving anti-gay talks.
LaBarbera responded that he does sometimes bring up the story of the cities that were destroyed by God as punishment for sin, but that people are often “ignorant” about what that has to do with the United States, where “the things homosexuals do in private, the orgies, etc…are every bit as evil as what we’d done in Sodom.”
“Jim, I think we would both agree that in some aspects America has surpassed Sodom in the evil that it allows,” he said. “We can’t all talk about it on this show, but I mean I’ve been to events that are incredibly perverse in their public events in San Francisco. And the things that homosexuals do in private, the orgies, etc., I think are every bit as evil as what we’d done in Sodom. We don’t know exactly what we’d done but we have an idea from the word of God.”
“So we’ve reached that level and we’re wondering what punishment does God have for us since we’re allowing the promotion of this in our nation,” he warned.
Finally, LaBarbera and Schneider got a call from a listener who said that he was a barber who wasn’t “against homosexuals” but maintained that he had the right to refuse service to a gay person because they might have AIDS.
“I’m a barber by trade and I’m not against homosexuals, I’m just against the lifestyle, so I get a one in my chair, I have the right to refuse not to shave his neck or use any implement that might cause blood because I don’t know if he’s got AIDS or anything,” he said.
LaBarbera, who earlier in the program had said that Christians wouldn’t refuse service to gay people, just to their weddings, didn’t address the issue directly but agreed that gay people have brushed “the safety of people” aside in their “fanatical push for gay rights.”
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.