Stan Solomon celebrated the death of Michael Brown on his talk show this week during an interview with Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly. The far-right pundit, who marked Trayvon Martin’s death in the same vein, said that “Michael Brown was shot because he’s a thug. I’m glad he’s dead. He deserves to be dead. He was a thug. He had a lifetime of thuggery and his dad was a convicted drug dealer.”
Solomon made the remarks after his other guest, conservative commentator Brent Johnson, dared to suggest that the grand jury investigating Brown’s death was “conducted in an extremely biased matter.” Solomon responded that he was “embarrassed” for Johnson.
Schlafly and Solomon both pledged to give officer Darren Wilson money and defended his role in the shooting.
When a number of prominent anti-abortion rights groups submitted an amicus brief defending the rights of pregnant workers in Young v. UPS, a case that was argued before the Supreme Court this week, we were not surprised that Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum was not among them. After all, Schlafly has built a long career out of arguing against protections for women in their careers.
In fact, it turns out, Schlafly submitted her very own amicus brief [pdf] in the case defending UPS’s right to suspend employees who become pregnant. And even thought the brief is written by Schlafly’s attorney Larry Joseph, it is full of classic Schlafly wisdom about how pregnant women most certainly cannot “have it all.”
In the brief, Eagle Forum argues that the plaintiff, Peggy Young, was seeking “preferential treatment” by not being suspended from her job for getting pregnant. In fact, the brief goes on to argue, in enacting the 1978 Pregnancy Discrimination Act, the interpretation of which is at issue in Young, “Congress never intended…to eliminate stereotypes of husband-breadwinner, wife-homemaker families” or “to have pregnant women work as package-delivering truck drivers” although the “eradication of typical – or even stereotypical – families was the goal of the feminist movement.”
In enacting PDA, Congress never intended: (1) to eliminate stereotypes of husband-breadwinner, wife-homemaker families; (2) to have women return to work immediately after giving birth to the exclusion of caring for their newborns; (3) to have pregnant women work as package-delivering truck drivers; or (4) to privilege the status of female truck drivers over either male truck drivers or the women married to male truck drivers. While the eradication of typical – or even stereotypical – families was the goal of the feminist movement, Congress generally has taken the more moderate path advocated by UPS here. By contrast, Young demands that UPS provide her with light duty for nine months when typical on the-job light duty lasts a month, so that she continues to draw her high pay while forcing her predominantly male coworkers – who support their own spouses and children – to do the heavy lifting. It insults pregnancy to characterize this situation as pregnancy discrimination.
The brief goes on to argue that Young and her allies want to “impose their pregnancies on coworkers,” thus “[f]acilitating single motherhood out of a strained sense of equality”:
At all times relevant to this action, Young herself was married to a man whose job provided medical insurance. Nonetheless, much of the advocacy and data submitted to this Court press the concerns of single women who work and want to have children. If PDA did allow women like Young and similarly situated single women to impose their pregnancies on coworkers, PDA might provide enough of a cushion for Young, but it would leave similarly situated single women short, once their children were born. Facilitating single motherhood out of strained sense of equality does not do the women or the children a significant or long-lasting favor[.]
Finally, Eagle Forum argues that for “both married women like Young and especially for single mothers” there is no right to work while pregnant. “Life is a series of tradeoffs,” it concludes, “and ‘you can have it all’ does not mean ‘having it all given to you.’”
Third, although Young herself was married when the underlying facts unfolded, the position pressed by Young and her amici also extends to single working mothers. For both married women like Young and especially for single mothers, neither this Court nor this Nation have ever recognized a “fundamental right to bear children while also participating fully and equally in the workforce.” Senator Williams – as quoted in Guerra – should not be construed to mean that women can “have it all” through some “fundamental right” to avoid the inevitable tradeoffs between work and family life. Life is a series of tradeoffs, and “you can have it all” does not mean “having it all given to you.”
[Citations removed for clarity]
Bill Donohue’s latest “Christian persecution” campaign took another bizarre twist yesterday when he told Newsmax host Steve Malzberg that he is willing to pay for therapy for non-religious people…since they are probably insane.
“They believe that freedom is license to do whatever they want,” the Catholic League president explained. “They don’t want to be told anything, which is why they die prematurely, they’re unhappy, that’s why we have a disproportionate number of agnostics and atheists in the asylum, all of this is true.”
Donohue said “secularists” have an inferior “mental health, physical health and degree of happiness,” adding: “They got to work it out, fine, I’ll help pay for their therapy, just take your hands, your mitts off the Catholics during Christmas.”
The Catholic League’s Bill Donohue stopped by Newsmax TV yesterday to advertise his Christmas-themed billboard campaign likening the supposed persecution of Christians in the U.S. to the violent targeting of Christians in the Mideast, insisting that liberals would brutally oppress Christians in America if they could get away with it.
Donohue bizarrely claimed that he posted the billboards in order to “make a point” but only to then immediately take that point back.
“The point is trying to make a point and then taking it back,” he said. “I am obviously not going to equate people who bash us in radio and television and the media in general and the entertainment industry with people who are going to behead us, but Christians and Catholics in particular are fed up with being bashed with impunity. It’s all about hate speech.”
When Malzberg asked if American liberals “would, if they could, go further” by violently attacking Christians, Donohue responded that “there’s no question about it.” “They would turn us into Cuba. As a matter of fact, Cuba I think has more rights now. The Cubans in Miami are building a Catholic church there and I don’t think you can get away with that in many parts of this country,” he added.
Michigan Republicans have delayed progress on a measure to include sexual orientation as a legally protected category in the 1976 Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act, the state’s anti-discrimination law. State representative-elect Todd Courser has emerged as one of the leading opponents of the effort, warning this week that the measure would give “special rights to the LGBT community, while placing the rights of religious groups and individuals in peril.”
His Thanksgiving message to supporters last week was even more blunt, citing the story of the Pilgrims, or at least the myth that they came in search of religious freedom, as a reason to oppose protections for gays and lesbians.
“Thanksgiving is about the impossible journey of a small group of worshipers who took flight from oppression to have the freedom to practice their religion without the interference of government,” Courser wrote in the message, “we are now, if this expansion to Elliott Larsen passes at the hands of my own party, at the point where the group that will be discriminated against is Christians and any other faith that chooses to stand against the LGBT activists — we will no longer have the freedom to practice our religion or have freedom of speech that our Founders personally sacrificed to give us.”
Warning of an attempt to “destroy freedoms of religion and speech for our children and their children” and “institutionalize discrimination against Christians and other faiths,” Courser wrote that lawmakers who back the effort are “promoting evil.”
I would normally send a message from my family to yours and avoid any talk about politics on Thanksgiving, but I feel impressed to take this moment and speak about the end of religious liberty and freedom of speech at the hands of our Republican Speaker in the State House. Thanksgiving is about the impossible journey of a small group of worshipers who took flight from oppression to have the freedom to practice their religion without the interference of government; we are now, if this expansion to Elliott Larsen passes at the hands of my own party, at the point where the group that will be discriminated against is Christians and any other faith that chooses to stand against the LGBT activists – we will no longer have the freedom to practice our religion or have freedom of speech that our Founders personally sacrificed to give us.
The Effort by the GOP to wrap this Expansion of Elliott Larsen in some weak religious exemption is akin to taking a Cheap Pig and Slapping a Cheap Lipstick Makeover on it; it is still a pig and it still has cheap lipstick on it. This is the granting of protected class status to the LGBT community and in doing so, it kills religious liberty and freedom of speech! Don't be fooled…and don't let your rep off the hook for standing SILENT as this rolls through the House. Ask them where their press releases on this issue are...encourage them to stand against this rouge action by the Republican Speaker who has been paid a small fortune and is partnering with the LGBT activists to destroy religious liberty and freedom of speech!
If this expansion to Elliott Larsen passes it will institutionalize discrimination against Christians and other faiths and make freedom of religion and freedom of speech subservient to the wishes of the homosexual lobby.
Please do not lose sight of this; it is the Republican Leadership actively moving the Democrat’s agenda, having partnered with the LGBT community to move this liberty killing legislation forward. If you don't tell your rep how you feel it’s going to happen! Then two years from now they will simply tell you they stood against it quietly.
"To not speak is to speak and to not act is to act..." For me it is time to speak...
We, as Republican Elected Officials cannot allow leaders, who exist by the power they derived from our districts, to promote evil, without standing up and forcing the issues into the public; if we do then we ourselves are complicit in this unholy alliance. Right now, it is the Republican, not the Democrat, leadership who is moving to grant protected class status to the LGBT community and in so doing destroy freedoms of religion and speech for our children and their children. We cannot stand silently as this happens as it is the very principle that founded this great nation. It is the Republicans, who are now termed out and leaving that are amassing capital for themselves to pursue cushy lobbying jobs or next election runs, who are promoting this evil. We, as leaders, are held to account for how and when we use our influence, especially when we refuse to stand up and call these actions out in our own party as evil.
Anti-immigrant activist William Gheen, the head of Americans for Legal Immigration, stopped by VCY America’s “Crosstalk” program yesterday to discuss how a coalition of “big tycoons and kings and princes and emperors” is trying to take America down through immigration, thus taking away power from Americans who celebrate Thanksgiving, Christmas and the Fourth of July, and his cunning plan to stop this from happening by having Rep. Louie Gohmert or Rep. Steve King ascend to the presidency.
“The megawealth of the planet has never really been happy about the United States of America and this entire concept that we the people are self-governed and in charge and that big tycoons and kings and princes and emperors, like Obama’s acting like, are not in charge,” Gheen said. “And they’ve found a way to take over our corporations, to take over our media, to take over our country by facilitating a very costly and deadly illegal alien invasion.”
He warned that Americans are in “mortal danger” from immigration and from the “growing anti-Christ spirit and anti-Christ movement in this country that is becoming stronger and more emboldened as the traditional conservative center-right Americans are displaced in our jobs and our politics and elections.”
“When you look at a lot of places around the world like China and Cambodia and Vietnam and parts of Africa and other places where leftist-socialist things like this have occurred,” he added, “things have gotten apocalyptically bad for the group of people that had been in power before the socialists took over.” Talk about “demographic change in America as if it’s a natural thing to occur,” he added, is “a constant narrative in the media that has tried to make gun owners look bad, white Americans look bad, gun owners look bad.”
“That type of aggression – some of which you see it around the Ferguson situation, and you saw it around Duke Lacrosse and you saw it around the Trayvon Martin situation — these defamation, these stirring people up,” he said, is resulting in “the over 320,000 violent crimes minorities commit against whites in America.” He warned that America is going the way of London, which he claimed is rife with “prior illegal aliens storming into neighborhoods and bursting right into the houses to rape and pillage because they’ve already disarmed everybody through full gun confiscation.”
Gheen also warned that the goal of immigration reform is to bring in voters who will vote for Democrats, thus displacing Americans who celebrate Christmas, Thanksgiving and the Fourth of July: “Once this happens, the Socialist States of America are fait accompli, and anybody that represents the sort of moderate ground or center-right past Americans that celebrated Christmas and Thanksgiving and things like that, Fourth of July type Americans, will never be in charge of our own country.”
But luckily, Gheen has a solution. When a caller asked about how to “remove Obama from office,” Gheen proposed a simple plan. First, he said, “we’re working on Boehner and McConnell right now because those dominos have to fall and we can move to the next phase.”
The next phase, he said, would be for Congress to impeach and remove both President Obama and Vice President Biden.
Then the final piece of the puzzle comes into place: get Rep. Louie Gohmert or Rep. Steve King elected Speaker of the House, so he can ascend to the presidency until the next election is held.
American Family Association radio host Sandy Rios reacted to a Staten Island grand jury’s decision not to indict the police officer responsible for the death of Eric Garner by warning that the move will be used by “the horrendous agitators among us to make the situation as bad as possible.”
Rios said that while she was “sad to see Eric Garner get arrested like that,” he should’ve knew better.
“He resisted arrest again. I don’t understand,” Rios said while reflecting on how a police officer taught her young son always obey the police. “Why Eric didn’t do that, I don’t know. They said he had been arrested 32 times prior to that so he certainly knew the drill. So it’s a sad, it’s very, very sad and it’s really sad to know now that this will be an occasion for more violence and more of the evil that loves this stuff and comes in and loves to stir it up and make a situation worse than it already is.”
The AFA spokeswoman then likened people demonstrating over Garner’s death to Chinese dictator Mao Zedong in their inclination to “agitate and to make matters worse.”
“That’s what the evil, dark center of the left does, and that’s certainly what they’re going to do,” she said.
The Michigan House of Representatives today passed a bill explicitly designed by its sponsor to allow discrimination against LGBT people. The proposed law, the Michigan Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which would mirror the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) at issue in the Supreme Court’s recent Hobby Lobby case, would allow individuals to cite their own religious beliefs to bypass state anti-discrimination laws.
“Religious liberty is a core American value,” said Michael Keegan, President of People For the American Way, “but this law isn’t written to defend an individual’s right to practice his or her own religion: it’s designed to legalize discrimination. Even more disturbing is the fact that the sponsor of this law explicitly says that he proposed it in order to weaken anti-discrimination protections for gay people that are under consideration. That’s a gross perversion of what religious liberty actually is.”
In addition to allowing individuals to ignore essential anti-discrimination laws, the law potentially permits individuals to exempt themselves from other laws they disapprove of on the basis of their religion. As a result of the Supreme Court’s misinterpretation of the federal RFRA in Hobby Lobby, and provisions of the bill itself, individuals could effectively claim exemption based on general offense to their religious beliefs without showing a truly substantial burden on their actual exercise of religion. The results could range from pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions for birth control, to hotel owners refusing to provide rooms to unmarried couples, to landlords refusing to rent homes to single parents.
“Laws that truly defend religious liberty serve as shields to prevent the government from impinging on our essential First Amendment rights,” said Keegan. “This law is a sword that allows individuals to harm others.”
For more information or to schedule an appointment with an expert on religious liberty issues, contact Layne Amerikaner at 202-467-4999 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
Wisconsin Republican state Sen. Glenn Grothman, who was recently elected to the U.S. House, appeared on “Washington Watch” yesterday to reiterate his pledge to weaken government efforts to help low-income families, which he has denounced as “a bribe not to work that hard or a bribe not to marry someone with a full-time job.”
The Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins, the host of the program, agreed with the Grothman, claiming that liberals see “big government entitlement programs” as “sacred” institutions, while the soon-to-be congressman warned that “the government is doing all they can to destroy the nuclear family.”
“Right now we are in a crisis in this country as the old-fashioned American family seems to be on a decline and there’s no question that one of the reasons is that the federal government, and to a lesser degree some state governments, are encouraging this,” Grothman said, before linking government programs to out-of-wedlock births: “in order to take advantage of the programs you almost have to be in a single-parent situation.”
Grothman alleged that the government has now set up a “bribe not to get married,” which is ballooning the national debt and preventing America “from being the great country we are.”
He added that the government’s “over-generosity” is “creating a society in which you are encouraging people to raise children out of wedlock” and “encouraging not the lifestyle that listeners of this program would want.”
Rep. Matt Salmon has joined his GOP colleague Peter King in denouncing critics of a grand jury’s decision not to indict a police officer in the death of Eric Garner, which sparked protests throughout the country.
While speaking with Newsmax host J.D. Hayworth today, the Arizona Republican said protesters should recognize that “it was clear to the grand jury that [the police officer] operated under the scope of his authority and he did what any reasonable officer would’ve done to subdue somebody that was resisting arrest.”
“Justice was served,” he added. “That’s the way the process works.”
Salmon added that he is tired of those who “constantly” bring up “allegations of profiling or whatever the case may be,” including “people who profit off of perpetuating these kinds of schisms in our society like Al Sharpton and those guys that are always constantly out there trying to make something that doesn’t exist.”
Yesterday, Bill Donohue of the Catholic League continued that narrative when he unveiled a new billboard that draws a parallel between the experiences of Christians in America and those of Christians facing violent persecution in the Mideast:
Donohue said in a statement that the billboard will go up in Los Angeles because he wants to send a message to Hollywood: “No, the Hollywood moguls who disrespect Christians are not the same as radical Muslims who behead us, but both are full of hate. Moreover, both need to be challenged. Christians are fed up with the barbarians abroad and the bigots at home. It’s time all these bullies learned to practice the virtue of tolerance and the meaning of diversity.”
Most recently, Donohue decried secular groups as “cultural fascists” and criticized the inclusion of non-Christian religious holidays in New York public schools since “everyone knows” that “we are a Christian nation.”
Rep. Paul Broun, the outgoing Georgia Republican who will be succeeded by fellow ultraconservative Jody Hice, spoke to Greg Corombos of Radio America yesterday about the House GOP’s strategy to fight President Obama’s “illegal and unconstitutional” executive action on immigration policy.
Broun urged congressional Republicans to “stop this runaway, imperial presidency.”
“He’s acting like a dictator and it just must stop and Congress has the ability to do that. We have to reel this president in, he’s acting in a very unprecedented way,” he said.
In fact, Broun has been warning that the president will become a Nazi/Soviet-style dictator since before Obama even took office.
NRA board member Ted Nugent, who is not exactly the most honest of activists or a unifying voice on race issues, told readers of his weekly WorldNetDaily column today that President Obama has appointed Rev. Al Sharpton to be his administration’s “race czar.”
Constantly catching our breath following one blow to the guts after another has become the new American mantra, but nothing could have prepared us for the president’s recent appointment of what may very well be the worst racist in the world today – his Reverend Al “not so” Sharpton.
Are you kidding me? This guy as some kind of race relations czar? Seriously?
And Al Gore is the expert on global warming, Michael “make stuff up as you go along” Moore will film the documentary, and I will edit the Lawrence Welk box set as soon as I hone up on my harpsichord jams.
You can’t make this stuff up.
Well, apparently you can make this stuff up, since “the president’s recent appointment” of Sharpton to be “some kind of race relations czar” never actually happened outside of Nugent’s fevered imagination and a handful of right-wing message boards.
But Nugent wasn’t done just yet, as he went on to claim that Obama is leading the country “into the pits of hell” and spurring racial violence.
Barak Obama’s cultists/sheep have cited ad nauseum how brilliant the man is. And on some considerations, they are correct. He is smart enough to know which buttons to push to continue his Saul Alinsky and Cloward-Piven destructo march of America into the pits of hell – or at the very least, something far removed from the original concept of America.
This man and his minions know no bounds on how to destroy America.
I thought the whole world already knew that the redistribution of earnings is social/cultural suicide.
I thought for sure everybody knew a dismantled, weak military was an invitation to our enemies to have at it.
I know for a fact that race relations in America in 2008 were the best they had been in 50 years.
I also know for a fact that race relations in America in 2014 are the worst they have been in my lifetime.
Blacks kill and maim more blacks in any given month that the Klan has in the last 25 years. God help us all.
Brainwashed dependency is the worse curse man can cause to another man.
Who doesn’t know that siding with Al Sharpton is the worse message anyone could possibly send to society, any society, black, white or other?
Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones hosted legendary conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly on his “Infowars” program today to talk about President Obama’s executive action granting deportation relief to some undocumented immigrants, which both agreed would inevitably lead to the collapse of the nation.
“This really is the end of the republic, the end of Congress,” Jones said. “There’s been a lot of signposts on this road to perdition, but I don’t think I have strong enough words for the constitutional crisis we’re in, where on guns, UN treaties, our military, our power plants, our borders.”
“Well, Alex, you’re absolutely right in what you said and there are several items that you pointed out that I haven’t seen in any other news media,” Schlafly replied. “It’s just an outrage, and it does spell the death of probably the country.”
Criticizing Republicans in Congress for doing too little to stop the immigration action, Schlafly said of Obama, “He’s doing it for Democratic votes and he’s doing it to really break down the American system the way it is and make us a different kind of country.”
“And it’s not like we’re getting immigrants from high-skilled areas, we’re getting people that almost vote to a man for the most radical socialist communist agendas,” Jones interjected.
“That’s all they know,” Schlafly agreed. “They come from a country where big government was everything. They don’t know anything about our constitutional principles of limited government and balance of budget and keep spending down, they’re not familiar with any arguments like that.”
Jones warned, “We are going the way of Rome bringing in the giant third-world populations, and it seems to be an accelerated collapse-of-Rome timetable now.
“Yes, you’re absolutely right and I think that’s what Obama wants,” Schlafly responded. “He does not want America to be exceptional. He does not want us to be religious or Christian. He wants to absolutely change us so we are no better than any other country.”
Conservative activist Alan Keyes, who apparently has been watching White House speeches on Ferguson that never took place in the real world, accused President Obama today of using the protests over Michael Brown’s death to intimidate Republicans in Congress into yielding to his political agenda.
Keyes, who faced off against Obama in the 2004 U.S. Senate race in Illinois, told Newsmax TV host Ed Berliner that the president is “exploiting this situation by way of threatening the Republicans, saying that there will be massive unrest if they don’t knuckle under to his will and trying to prove that he’s got the power to turn our cities into powder kegs that will explode in the face of anybody who opposes him.”
“It’s a Hitlerian tactic and I think we ought not to as Americans respond to it with anything but contempt,” he said.
Speaking today with Newsmax TV host Steve Malzberg, who called the outrage over the failure to indict the officer responsible for Michael Brown’s shooting “insane,” Pat Buchanan insisted that Obama administration officials “slandered” the city of Ferguson “when neither the cops nor Darren Wilson nor the city have done anything to deserve this.”
“What in heaven’s name have the Ferguson police ever done to deserve what has been done to them?” he added.
Buchanan then compared Ferguson demonstrators and people engaging in civil disobedience to the aides of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie who allegedly shut down access to a bridge in order to punish a city’s mayor for not endorsing him.
Buchanan said that like Bridgegate, the Ferguson protesters are engaging in a a grand conspiracy that violates people’s civil rights: “What about the national conspiracy to get together to shut down cities and block highways and block bridges and block commuter trains orchestrated and organized, why isn’t the Justice Department investigating that? That massive violation of the civil rights of commuters and travelers and workers and everyone.”
American Religious Right leaders Mat Staver and Judith Reisman are scheduled to be featured speakers at a conference in Jamaica this weekend hosted by a group that has been working to preserve the country’s criminal ban on consensual gay sex.
The annual conference, hosted by the Jamaica Coalition for a Healthy Society, will focus on how “[c]ontemporary society has become increasingly hostile to the traditional definitions of marriage and family” and Staver, the head of Liberty Counsel, will discuss “global legal trends impacting the institution of the family.”
JCHS’s conference has drawn prominent American anti-gay activists before. In 2012, two top lawyers for the Alliance Defending Freedom spoke at the conference, one of whom defended Jamaica’s anti-sodomy law, calling homosexuality “harmful not only spiritually and psychologically, but also physically.” Last year, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality’s Peter LaBarbera made an appearance at the conference, urging Jamaicans: “Do not be like us, do not be like Britain, do not sit idly by as so-called ‘LGBT activists’ manipulate words and laws to achieve dominance in your country.”
LaBarbera distanced himself from the U.S. State Department’s support for LGBT rights around the world, telling attendees (as transcribed by a Buzzfeed reporter who attended):
I do not stand with my government. I’m a patriotic American, but I do not stand with the current United States government in its promotion of homosexuality and gender confusion. But I do stand with the Jamaican people … I pray that you will learn from our mistakes and from lessons of history and avoid the inevitable moral corruption and health hazards and the danger to young people that come from capitulating to this sin movement that calls itself gay. It is almost now can be predicted with 100 percent accuracy, if the law is a teacher: If you take down this law, it will only lead to more demands. Appeasement does not work.
MassResistance’s Brian Camenker has also headlined a rally for the group.
The groups organizing the conference have opposed efforts to overturn the country’s anti-sodomy laws, which impose up to 10 years imprisonment for gay sex. Jamaica CAUSE, a cosponsor, organized rallies earlier this year to oppose an effort to overturn the law. The main sponsor, Jamaica Coalition for a Healthy Society, also supports keeping the laws. On its website, JCHS provides a document called “Frequently Asked Questions About The Buggery Law” that attributes homosexuality to “economic reasons, direct Satanic influence, media and entertainment enticement, and experiences during incarceration” and cautions, “If determining human rights is separated from morality and based on individual freedom without any restraints, all perversions will in due time become ‘rights’.”
In a section on countries with greater freedom for LGBT people, the group adopts the American Right’s persecution messaging:
Why is it so important to certain countries, such as the UK, that Jamaica removes the buggery law?
Homosexuals in those countries have gained political power and so are able to use the machinery of the state to achieve their ends. It is interesting to note that the aim in these countries is not just that the buggery law is repealed, but that all types of sexual behaviour, including pedophilia and bestiality, should be eventually legalized as alternative sexual orientations. Further, the removal of the buggery law often results in attacks on freedom of speech and religion so that those who speak out against homosexuality are discriminated against and victimized. They want all types of sexual behavior to be legal.
JCHS defends Jamaica’s anti-sodomy, or “buggery,” law this way:
Since the buggery law is difficult to police shouldn’t it be removed from the books? Laws have multiple roles. (i) instruction on right behaviour that benefit individuals and society (ii) deterrence against wrong behaviour (iii) punishment for wrong behaviour. The law of the land bears witness to that which the state approves. This is important because this determines, for example, what can and can’t be taught to children in schools. Laws against murder, littering and traffic violations have not prevented these activities but that is no reason for these laws to be removed. Because a law cannot be policed does not mean it should be removed.
The group also provides images like this as “media resources”:
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who is poised to become the new Senate Majority Leader when Republicans take over the Senate in January, is well known for his opposition to limits on big money in politics – whether through his unabashed support for the disastrous Citizens United ruling or his filibusters to prevent Senate votes on laws requiring more campaign finance disclosure. Now, before he even becomes Majority Leader, McConnell has already tried to further dismantle commonsense rules on money in elections.
McConnell attempted to add a rider to an omnibus appropriations bill – which must pass in order to prevent another government shutdown – that would “effectively chip away at direct contribution limits for candidates.” After opposition from sitting Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Rules Committee Chairman Charles Schumer (D-NY), Senator McConnell has backed off his proposal for now. Nonetheless, the writing is on the wall. McConnell wants to further deregulate the spending of private money in political campaigns.
Under current law, contributions to candidates in a two-year cycle are limited to $5,200 per donor. Donors can also give $20,000 to state party committees and more than $60,000 to national party committees. Currently candidates are limited in their ability to coordinate spending with the party committees that support them. If passed, McConnell’s measure would have effectively allowed party committees to fully coordinate with candidates in spending campaign funds.
While Senate Democrats rejected the rider, Sen. McConnell’s actions clearly show his intentions to further roll back existing campaign finance laws and threaten efforts to limit big money in politics when Republicans take charge of the Senate in January. This is likely a preview of what’s in store for us in the coming years.
Rep. Trent Franks believes that President Obama’s executive action on immigration was such an egregious step that it may cause the rule of law to collapse and compel the U.S. send an apology to England for the American Revolution.
While speaking yesterday with Frank Gaffney, the Arizona Republican said that Obama is “dividing the country in some very significant ways and I don’t think that he serves either the illegal immigration community or the cause of the rule of law or justice in general in any way when he makes these kinds of unilateral decisions.”
“I think that there’s probably nothing that this president has done or is doing that is more dangerous to the fundamental foundation of this Republic then ignoring the Constitution and betraying his oath of office” he said. “There is something very frightening about a president who simply aggregates this power onto himself and ignores the very oath that he took that president.”
“Without trying to sound overwrought, it literally could be the death of the Republic because once the chief executive officer of any republic all of the sudden begins to ignore the rule of law to hold himself unconstrained to the Constitution and to the truth of his own words, if that should become a common practice of presidents, then that little unpleasantness with England we had is something we should probably apologize for,” Franks added.