Bryan Fischer is outraged that a federal judge may order the dozens of Alabama probate who are refusing to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples to back down. On his American Family Radio Program today, Fischer said that such an order would be tantamount to “tyranny” and “slavery” enforced by the “gay gestapo.”
“There’s a court hearing today before the federal judge, and she may order these probate judges to violate their own conscience and their own religious scruples,” he said. “She may order them to violate their conscience. You know what that is, ladies and gentlemen? You are ordered by an agent of the government to violate your conscience? That is tyranny.”
“When you are ordered by an agent of the government to violate your own conscience in something that you do, that is slavery. If you are forced to violate your conscience to do work, that is tyranny, that’s Tammy Bruce, that’s the gay gestapo. Tammy Bruce is the one that coined the term ‘gay gestapo.’ That’s the gay gestapo at work. You either do what we tell you or you’re going to get punished.”
As we reported earlier today, Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore has close personal and financial ties with Michael Peroutka, the neo-Confederate activist and theocrat who has helped develop the view, espoused by Moore in recent interviews and statements, that states must defy federal court rulings in favor of marriage equality since they are in violation of divine law.
Warren Throckmorton notes, just today announced that on April 14 it will host a celebration of the anniversary of the “execution of the tyrant Abraham Lincoln.”
League of the South President Michael Hill writes in a blog post titled “Honoring John Wilkes Booth” that the organization “thanks Mr. Booth for his service to the South and to humanity”:
The League of the South looks to the present and future. However, from time to time we do look back at our past.
This 14th of April will mark the 150th anniversary of John Wilkes Booth’s execution of the tyrant Abraham Lincoln. The League will, in some form or fashion, celebrate this event. We remember Booth’s diary entry: “Our country owed all her troubles to him, and God simply made me the instrument of his punishment.” A century and a half after the fact, The League of the South thanks Mr. Booth for his service to the South and to humanity.
Stay tuned . . .
It might be a good time to harken back to the League of the South’s 2012 convention, when Peroutka asked participants to stand for the “national anthem”… and then started singing “Dixie”:
Yesterday, the Family Research Council’s Craig James used his time as the guest host of “Washington Watch” to suggest that President Obama is seeking an unconstitutional third term in office, possibly in order to advance the cause of Islam.
Last week, James also filled in for FRC President Tony Perkins as the host of the radio program, and spoke with several callers who said Obama is a secret Muslim, a point he did not deny.
When one caller told James that Obama “doesn’t like the United States, he’s not a Christian, he’s a Muslim and he’s defending the Muslim country,” James replied: “I agree. He definitely does not have the faith system that I have….I don’t get the sense that he has a personal relationship with the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ that I do. And he’s the leader of our country and for him to be there, it’s just mindboggling. I can’t say he’s a Muslim, I don’t know what he is, but I can say what he’s not, he’s not a good leader.”
Another caller said that Obama is “an Islamic sympathizer” and “a terrorist in hiding” who is “trying to destroy this country and he was put here to destroy this country.”
“Yeah,” James replied. “You’re entitled to your thoughts and your opinion and you’re not crazy. Without question he has backed off of the role of leadership in realizing that America is exceptional, that we are the leaders of the free world. He didn’t go to Paris in leading the other worldwide leaders…. There are just so many examples of where he has failed.”
He added: “We’ve got almost two years to go and that’s a lot of time, a lot of destruction can take place during that point in time.”
Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore threw his state into turmoil this week when he ordered probate judges to defy a federal judge’s ruling striking down the state’s ban on same-sex marriage and refuse to issue marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples. Moore, who has a history of making extreme anti-gay statements, insists that the federal judge is the one who is really breaking the law since she violateddivinelaw by ruling for marriage equality.
Moore’s call for statewide defiance of the federal judiciary’s “tyranny” stems from a belief that the Constitution was made to protect biblical commandments, so that anything that goes against his personal interpretation of the Bible is therefore in violation of the Constitution.
Moore shares that belief with a powerful ally: Michael Peroutka, a neo-Confederate activist who is also one of the most influential behind-the-scenes figures in the Religious Right’s reimagining of American law.
Peroutka, who once held a leadership position in the neo-Confederate League of the South and remained a member of the group until it hampered his run for a local office in Maryland last year, promotes this theocratic view of the law through his group the Institute on the Constitution. Speaking at an event at the Institute in 2011, Moore gushed that Peroutka would help lead America to a “glorious triumph” over the federal government’s “tyranny.”
After Moore was removed from his original position on Alabama’s high court in 2003 for defying a federal court order to remove a monument of the Ten Commandments from the state judicial building, Peroutka paid for the ousted judge to go on a national speaking tour to build support for his cause. He also funded a group that held rallies in support of Moore.
Over nine years, Peroutka contributed over a quarter of a million dollars to two groups founded by Moore, the Foundation for Moral Law (which is now run by Moore’s wife Kayla) and the now-defunct Coalition to Restore America.
In 2004, the far-right Constitution Party tried to recruit Moore to run for president on its ticket. When he declined, Peroutka stepped in to run in his place.
This neo-Confederate leader helped to lay the ideological groundwork for Moore’s current standoff with the federal courts, a standoff which many commentators have compared to Alabama Gov. George Wallace’s decision to defy federal law on desegregation.
Peroutka said last year that such rulings would “coerce” state officials to “declare that which is sinful and immoral” to be “valid and right,” even forcing them to “participate in it.” Such “evil” decisions, according to Peroutka, must be “resisted at every level of government, even the lower levels of government, most especially the lower levels of government,” since local governments are the true “protectors against those who would force these things on us tyrannically from above.”
For example, after a federal judge struck down Kentucky’s ban on same-sex marriage last year, Peroutka insisted that Sen. Rand Paul move to impeach the judge who made the decision, defund the court, and press for his state to defy the ruling: “He should use every influence he has in Kentucky to have people not obey this; the Kentucky legislature, the Kentucky courts, should not obey this, this is not lawful.”
Peroutka also believes that local officials should defy their state legislatures on issues like marriage equality. After Maryland’s general assembly voted in 2012 to legalize same-sex marriage in the state, Peroutka declared that the assembly’s decision to “violate God’s laws” effectively invalidated its legal authority, since any law that contradicts divine law does “not constitute a law – even if it were enacted and signed.”
Using an argument similar to the one Moore is now making in Alabama, Peroutka said that lower-level officials could ignore not only the marriage equality law but any law passed by the state’s general assembly, since it had invalidated itself by breaking biblical decrees: “Is it possible that those who are sworn to uphold the law, such as police and sheriffs and judges and prosecutors, may soon come to the conclusion that the enactments of this body should be ignored because they are based not in law, but in lawlessness?”
In Peroutka’s view, anything that breaks the “organic law,” or biblical law, is automatically unconstitutional.
Peroutka believes that America needs to “go back to what God called marriage, not what the state has perverted the definition to be, but what God called marriage.” Since biblical law doesn’t permit same-sex marriage in his view, then civil law can’t either: “There is no way we are ever going to validate homo- or sodomite-‘unmarriage’ because God defined marriage as between a man and a woman once and forever.”
“I always go back to these two standards: What does God say and what does the Constitution say?” Peroutka explained in 2013.
He added that the United States will have a small, limited government as long as it adheres to biblical standards. But he believes that the Union’s victory in the Civil War — or as he calls it, “The War Between the States” — enabled the federal government to greatly expand its powers, thus undermining the authority of biblical law and leading to such evils as same-sex marriage.
“Ever since then, there’s been this huge black hole of centralized power that’s formed in Washington, D.C.” he said. “People sometimes talk about ‘The War Between the States’ as being about the issue of slavery. I believe that history is written by the winners, it wasn’t about that at all. What it was about was consolidating power into the hands of a few people.”
“[T]he real effect of the war and the Reconstruction after the war was to take the very foundation of our understanding of our rights away from us, that is to say that they come from God, and put them in the hands of men and say that they come from the Supreme Court or they come from the legislature or they come from the executive,” he added.
The end of the Civil War, Peroutka claims, produced an “evil anti-God, anti-Christian revolution” that led to a “tyrannical consolidation of power” in Washington, D.C., undermining the “biblical worldview that acknowledges Christ’s authority over all things.”
Peroutka also contends that the gay rights movement isn’t just “federalizing homosexuality” but “federalizing perversion,” even claiming that the federal government violated the Constitution by imposing civil rights laws on the states.
“[T]he so-called civil rights laws are not law,” he said in 2013. “They never should’ve been passed. They’re not law now, they weren’t law then. They aren’t law now because there is no such thing as a civil right.”
Since Peroutka believes “rights come from God” and not civil government, he argues that all civil rights laws are illegitimate since “the term ‘civil rights’ is kind of an oxymoron. There’s no ‘right’ in the sense of a permanent, fixed, thing that you have, that can be defended, if in fact it comes from the civil government.”
Now Moore is once again putting Peroutka’s words into action, threatening state judges who lawfully issue a marriage licenses to a same-sex couples. Because in the eyes of Moore and Peroutka, their personal reading of the Bible takes precedence over the law of the land.
Pouncing on David Axelrod’s recent claim that President Obama hid his support for same-sex marriage during the 2008 presidential campaign, Jack Cashill of WorldNetDaily wonders today about what else the president is hiding…perhaps, his secret Muslim faith?
Cashill writes today in a column titled “Barry’s Stunning Bit of Blasphemy” that Axelrod’s “revelation casts further doubt upon Obama’s professed Christianity and fuels the speculation that he might well be a crypto-Muslim.”
Cashill points to a Jamie Foxx joke as further proof that while Obama may be “a secret Muslim,” “even Allah must take a seat in the back pews of the Church of Obama.”
For Obama, lying about his faith was apparently no big deal. As he told Axelrod after stumbling through a question on same-sex marriage, “I’m just not very good at bulls––ing.”
One has to ask, if Obama was willing to bulls–- about his relationship with God, what was he not willing to bulls–- about? Why should anyone, for instance, believe his “for me as a Christian” line?
The Axelrod revelation casts further doubt upon Obama’s professed Christianity and fuels the speculation that he might well be a crypto-Muslim.
Obama did little to shore up his Christian credentials in comparing ISIS to the Crusades at least week’s much discussed National Prayer Breakfast.
“It’s like church in here,” actor Jamie Foxx said at the 2012 Soul Train Awards. “First of all, give an honor to God and our Lord and Savior Barack Obama.”
Obama could not have said it better himself. If he really is a secret Muslim, I suspect even Allah must take a seat in the back pews of the Church of Obama.
Earlier this week a South Dakota state senate committee tabled a bill promoted by the “intelligent design” group Discovery Institute that identified "biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming, [and] human cloning" as scientifically controversial areas and, in the words of the National Center for Science Education, "would, in effect, have allowed public school teachers to miseducate their students about science — and would have prevented state and local educational authorities from intervening."
Although the bill didn’t make it out of committee, it had some high-profile backers, including a state representative of Concerned Women for America and a representative from the South Dakota Family Policy Council. In addition, the Discovery Institute flew in a spokesman, Casey Luskin, to testify on behalf of the bill, which seems to have been loosely based on the Institute’s model legislation.
Luskin told the committee that while in the days of the Scopes trial teachers were persecuted for teaching evolution, today teachers are being “persecuted” and “censored” for dissenting to “Darwin’s theory and other controversial scientific topics.”
“The old Scopes trial stereotype of teachers fearing persecution for teaching the evidence for evolution has been overturned,” he said. “Today, it’s the teachers and students who are raising questions about modern neo-Darwinian theory who are being stifled.”
Rep. Scott Perry, Republican of Pennsylvania, stopped by a “Defeat Jihad Summit” hosted by Frank Gaffney yesterday, to discuss the “conundrum” that he’s in about whether to vote for the Authorization for the Use of Military Force that President Obama has sent to Congress to formally approve the ongoing military actions against the so-called Islamic State.
Perry said that while he feels “duty bound” to stop the “growing scourge” of the Islamic State, he doesn’t want to sanction the use of force by Obama, who he claimed is “really working collaboratively with what I would say is the enemy of freedom and individual freedom and liberty and Western civilization and modernity.”
“And in that context, how do you vote to give this commander-in-chief the authority and power to take action when…you know in your heart that, if past performance is any indicator of future performance, that he won’t, and that he actually might use it to further their cause and what seems to be his cause and just drag you as a complicitor [sic] in it,” he said.
Pamela Geller said in an interview yesterday that she warned America early on in Barack Obama’s presidency that he was “this usurper, this interloper, this fraud,” but that nobody listened to her because he was “the first black president and America wanted to show she wasn’t racist.”
As a result, Geller told VCY America’s Vic Eliason, Obama’s “coup from within” is “going to be America’s greatest challenge,” even greater than the Civil War. She said she would have rather the first African American president be someone “noble and American and patriotic” like conservative author and pundit Thomas Sowell, columnist Shelby Steele or former Florida Rep. Allen West. But, she told Eliason, she fears the “zombie-like” younger generation will do nothing to stop the course of the country because it was raised on a “toxic ooze of leftist inculcation.”
But I wasn’t reading the tea leaves, it was there for anyone that was interested. But the world was in love with this idea, you know, the first black president and America wanted to show she wasn’t racist. But what America neglected to ascertain was the content of the man’s character and he was not vetted. So it’s a pity that the first African American president wasn’t someone who was noble and American and patriotic like, you know, a Thomas Sowell or an Allen West or a Shelby Steele, or, you know, some of the greats, some of the really American greats, and it was this usurper, this interloper, this fraud.
So, this is, I think, going to be America’s greatest challenge. And she’s been challenged. I mean, I’m not discounting the Civil War and myriad difficulties. This is a great nation with great problems and great successes and a magnificence, an exceptionalism all its own. But this, this is a coup from within. So, we have to, it’s going to be, I think, a terrible struggle. And if it’s not a terrible struggle, that means that we’re just going to go quietly into the night.
I don’t see America going quietly into the night. But I could be wrong. We have a generation that’s been raised on this leftist ooze, this toxic ooze of leftist inculcation, and they’re pretty zombie-like, so I don’t know.
Geller told Eliason that Obama’s use of the term is “to deceive and it’s to distract.” She also objected to Secretary of State John Kerry’s occasional use of the Arabic term “Daesh” — which the so-called Islamic State hates — to describe the group when speaking to Arab leaders.
“And now he’s calling them to further confuse the people, ‘Daesh,’” Geller complained. “And ‘Daesh’ is Islamic State in Arabic. Well, excuse me, Mr. President, but we speak American here. We speak American English here. We speak English.”
“So, the idea that he’s speaking Arabic to further confuse the American people,” she said. “Because the American people, they love their fun, they love their lives, their hobbies, they’re not news junkies. And so, they turn on a report and hear ‘ISIL’ and they turn on another report and hear ‘ISIS’ and they hear another report and they say ‘Daesh,’ and they think it’s four different, five different groups!”
Michael Savage is positively outraged about President Obama’s remarks about the terrorist attack at a kosher deli in Paris, railing against Obama as “the Jew-hater in the White House.”
“How can the Jewish people ever vote for this man who hates Israel and hates the Jews?” Savage asked on his radio show today.
The right-wing talk show host went on to cite a fake quote from Valerie Jarrett, in which she “says” that she wants to make America a “more Islamic country,” in order to prove his point that Obama is a secret Muslim who seeks to “attack Jews.”
Savage’s meltdown continued as he called White House spokesman Josh Earnest a “piece of human garbage,” a “filthy double-talking piece of—” and a “lying, simpering, inhuman thing” who is “a shame to his mother and father and a shame to his entire genealogy, he has just disgraced his entire gene pool.”
“This thing has to go, this creep, this creep, this lowlife creep spokesmouth for Obama just did something that Goebbels wouldn’t have dared do,” Savage said. “If there really is a God in Heaven and a Judgment Day, man, I want to be there, I want to be there when this character who talks for Obama like this goes before whoever does the prejudging for God. I’d like to be in the audience, I’d like to see what the punishment would be, because there will be punishment for this man in his own life, he will get sick from his own words.”
He then called out Steven Spielberg, Jeffrey Katzenberg, David Geffen and Michael Bloomberg as part a modern-day Sanhedrin run by the “Jews of Hollywood” that backs the “Fuhrer” Obama.
On his radio show yesterday, Steve Deace played clips of interviews he held recently with likely presidential candidates on whether “the sexual revolution trumps the American Revolution,” or if “someone’s erotic liberty trumps your religious liberty.”
The Iowa talk radio host directed these questions at potential presidential candidates Mike Huckabee, Ted Cruz, Ben Carson, Scott Walker and Rick Santorum, along with consistent non-candidate Donald Trump.
All six Republican politicians agreed that no, “erotic liberty” does not trump religious liberty. Santorum stressed that freedom of religion takes precedence over “the newfound freedom to do whatever you want to do from a sexual orientation — not a sexual orientation — a sexual activity point of view, that to me is a much lower freedom because is an activity, it is not at the heart of who you are.”
Deace also discussed new claims that President Obama reversed his previous support for same-sex marriage as a presidential candidate in 2008 because he feared upsetting African American voters, asserting that Obama only hid his real stance on marriage equality in order to become “America’s first champion for sodomy in the White House.”
“There is a word we typically use to describe those who mislead their own tribe, mislead their own peer group, commit acts of treachery like this to manipulate them: this is traitorous, absolutely traitorous,” Deace said.
When the Family Research Council’s Craig James guest-hosted today’s edition of “Washington Watch,” several callers asked him if President Obama is plotting to illegally stay in office after his second term expires. After one caller made the allegation, a second one told James that conservatives will have to “drag” Obama out of Washington D.C. to make sure he leaves office.
“I know there are a whole host of people lined up ready to help make sure that occurs,” James said.
James told one caller, who alleged that the president will “have this country turned over to Islam” in his third term, that Obama does not believe in Jesus Christ.
When speaking to yet another caller who said Obama “will declare a state of emergency, he will do a third term if that’s what it takes to complete the conversion of this country,” James said the third-term conspiracy is “a concern of mine” and pledged to “pass a note along to Tony Perkins,” the president of the FRC, “on how we could escape that.”
“That would be horrible,” James said of third Obama term. “It’s not like we’d have Ronald Reagan staying in office for another year or so while we’re in a state of emergency. It’s not like we’d have someone who really cares about you and me. We’re talking about someone who is there in that office as the leader of the free world, the United States of America, who doesn’t get it. That’s the concern. It fires me up, the thought that the guy can stick around in that office beyond a year and three-quarters. He’s got to be gone. We will follow up on that.”
In an interview with the Family Research Council’s Craig James yesterday, Rep. Randy Weber, R-Tex., urged Americans to organize to stop marriage equality rulings from taking effect in their states.
Weber, who was on “Washington Watch” promoting a bill he wrote that would make it harder for the federal government to recognize same-sex marriages, told James that Americans who oppose marriage equality should urge their state legislatures, county commissions and city councils to “pass resolutions that say, ‘Look, we support the traditional view of marriage, one man and one woman for life.’”
If this happens, he said, “maybe that will be a groundswell where people can get behind this and say, ‘Look, we’re tired of activist judges just systematically destroying the foundation of the family by throwing out a lot of these laws that people have voted for.’”
“You’ve got to be watching the absolute insanity out of some of these judges across the country, especially what’s happening in Alabama where just the turmoil created by the Windsor case, the Supreme Court striking down that part of the Windsor case, has been unbelievable,” Weber said. “They have just thrown the entire country, in my opinion, into turmoil with a lot of these judges saying, ‘Well, it’s a right, the people of those states cannot choose what they want their state to look like.’”
In an interview with Newsmax today, conservative activist Star Parker — who has spent this week repeatedlyaccusing President Obama of “verbal rape” — attacked the president for his comments about the attack on a Jewish deli in Paris, saying that what “the radical extreme of Muslims and this president and all secularists have in common is they hate that biblical worldview, so therefore they hate America and they hate Israel.”
Parker said that the president’s actions have awakened those who “did not notice that we have been as a country taken over by extremists, by secular humanists who have a worldview in statism,” comparing the current political climate to the years before the Civil War.
“Some think the Tea Party is over and it’s not,” she said. “This is a momentum in our society that is not going to blow away any time soon, because most Americans who are the hard-working, who are the diligent, the god-fearing, understand that we’re in a very prayerful crossroads similar to an 1850s, where we can’t go on like we’ve been going for the last 50 or 60 years.”
“I believe that [Obama’s comment] builds the resolve in the American people that Israel’s values are our values, the core fundamental beliefs of America, our exceptionalism, our national allegiance, our limited role of government, our free markets, and our tradition,” she said. “This is what we have in common, and this is what secularists don’t like, and Barack Obama’s a secularist. And, in fact, it’s what he and the Muslims have in common, the radical extreme of Muslims and this president and all secularists have in common is they hate that biblical worldview, so therefore they hate America and they hate Israel.”
Rep. Walter Jones, R-N.C., is upset that congressional Republicans are using legal action and threatening to cut funding to the Department of Homeland Security in their effort to undermine President Obama’s executive actions on immigration.
Jones told Newsmax host J.D. Hayworth, a former Republican congressman, that members of Congress have a “constitutional duty” to reprove and penalize Obama for allegedly violating the Constitution: “I said that to John Boehner when Mr. Obama made this presidential order, I said why don’t we follow the Constitution, in the Constitution, articles of impeachment? I’m sorry, I don’t like the idea of impeaching anyone, but for goodness sakes when you make those kinds of executive decisions to the detriment of our country, of telling people who came here illegally, ‘You’re now illegal because I just signed an order,’ that’s why we’re in the situation we’re in now, we don’t follow the Constitution.”
Across Alabama, local judges are openly defying a federal judicial order to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The New York Times reported yesterday that 44 of the state's 67 counties were not granting licenses. The state is a checkerboard, where gay and lesbian Alabamans are locked out of full citizenship across vast swaths of the state based on the whims of local officials.
As many observers have pointed out, this week's events make Americans recall the state's historic resistance to federal court orders striking down segregation. But they show us an image of the future, as well ... or at least the future as the Far Right would have it.
Emboldened by the Supreme Court's distortion of religious liberty in the Hobby Lobby case, some state legislatures are considering bills that would allow government officials to decline to perform marriages that offend them religiously. A number of states are also considering legislation to let people exempt themselves from anti-discrimination and other laws if compliance would offend them religiously. While misleadingly framed as protecting religious liberty, these bills are really intended to allow discrimination and to let conservatives impose their religious beliefs on others.
So what would America look like if we allowed such massive holes to be poked in laws that are supposed to protect everyone? What if lesbian and gay couples were legally treated as outsiders in their home communities, had fewer legal rights than anyone else in those communities, and had to travel anywhere from another neighborhood to another county to find a bakery willing to make a cake for them, a hotel willing to rent them a room for the night, or an employer willing to grant them spousal employment benefits? What if a woman's ability to find adequate healthcare depended on finding an employer and a pharmacist with compatible religious beliefs? What if people's basic rights varied depending on where they were, and upon the prevailing religious beliefs of people in the area? What would such a religiously balkanized nation look like?
It would look a lot like Alabama does today. And it would be ugly.
For decades, the Far Right has fought tooth and nail to impose their religious beliefs through government fiat. They have fought to prevent gays from marrying, to prevent women from exercising reproductive choice, to have public schools indoctrinate other people's children with their own religious beliefs, ... the list goes on. And when they fail at changing the laws to match their religion, they seek exemptions from those laws in the name of "religious liberty."
Mission America’s Linda Harvey is urging conservatives to use Valentine’s Day to “promote true love,” which, as she explains in a WorldNetDaily column today, means opposing LGBT rights. She urges readers to mark the holiday by demanding that companies drop their support for LGBT equality and posting “an online comment challenging notions of homosexuality as ‘marriage’ or anti-Christian bigotry.”
“Don’t be afraid to say, ‘Not true!’ when some maintain that sodomy and abortion are the high ground, as is same-sex ‘marriage,’ that children should be encouraged to change genders, that Americans are all racists and that Christianity is hateful,” she writes.
Harvey also tells readers to oppose “vicious feminists” and schools that teach “anti-American, pro-Marxist lessons.”
The leftists love Valentine’s Day. This year, they will exhibit a bizarre preoccupation with the movie “Fifty Shades of Grey,” as America’s notion of “love” is stretched to unrecognizable limits.
But as Christians, we think of love in a different sense. It’s one that “does not rejoice in inquity, but rejoices in the truth.” (1 Corinthians 13:6)
So what can Christians do in 2015 to promote true love?
Despite some disturbing, jaw-dropping events of the past year, and some daunting ones in the coming months, we really aren’t at the mercy of cowardly Republicans, destructive Democrats, vicious feminists and homosexual bullies.
While designers of wickedness present great challenges to American culture, to freedom and to the rule of law, let’s never forget that those who hate godliness are in self-destruction mode.
While we pray for any individuals who can be pulled out of the coming fire, let’s lovingly assist the unworthy causes they espouse toward a sure demise.
The loony left does not represent America, and their ideas are mostly poison. Let me make it clear: I am not advocating civil unrest or violence here (like liberals sometimes do), but in the public square of reasonable debate over public policy, don’t let unhinged voices get away with calculated deception, obfuscation and other evil nonsense. Expose mythology for what it is.
Don’t be afraid to say, “Not true!” when some maintain that sodomy and abortion are the high ground, as is same-sex “marriage,” that children should be encouraged to change genders, that Americans are all racists and that Christianity is hateful. Get ready to say NO and shine the light of reality back at them.
So, how do we do this? Start with fervent and persistent prayer. Then, commit to at least one “push back” activity each week. Make one phone call to a corporate supporter of “LGBT” deviance, or send one email to a pro-abortion politician. Make an online comment challenging notions of homosexuality as “marriage” or anti-Christian bigotry. Be sure to call your child’s school and object to anti-American, pro-Marxist lessons.
Here’s a good place to start: the erroneously named “Corporate Equality Index” of the Human Rights Campaign. This pedophile-founded, multi-million dollar homosexual lobbying group is a pretender to high-minded notions of “equality” and “non-discrimination.” HRC is a vicious bully with an empire built on attacking personal sexual integrity, undermining authentic families, promoting deviance and mischaracterizing Christians.
So consult this listing of businesses that have signed on to HRC’s “gay” agenda, and make a call to one each week. Just ask: “Why is your company supporting the harmful homosexual agenda? Why are you donating to advance same sex ‘marriage’? No one needs to be homosexual, and no one is born in the wrong sex body. It’s a mistake for your company, wrong for your employees and for America.”
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins spent a good portion of his “Washington Watch” radio program on Monday praising Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore and the state probate judges who are refusing to follow a federal court order legalizing same-sex marriage in the state.
Perkins said that he, too, is “not going to listen to these courts that are wrong” when they make a ruling that is “inconsistent with nature itself, certainly inconsistent with scripture.”
The federal courts, he added, “are setting themselves up to lose credibility and put, I believe, our country into a tailspin.”
What is the rule of law? In a free society, a democratic society, the rule of law is generated, over all, [by the] Constitution and general consensus. We agree. And when you go too far out, which this administration has and these courts are, it doesn’t work. An unjust law is no law at all.
And they are setting themselves up to lose credibility and put, I believe, our country into a tailspin. Because I’m not going to listen to these courts that are wrong, when they have taken away the rights of the people and just imposed upon this nation a viewpoint that is not shared by a majority of the people. Even if it was, it’s inconsistent with nature itself, certainly inconsistent with scripture.
Last June, the Supreme Court gave certain for-profit corporations the right to deny women vitally important (and statutorily required) healthcare coverage that offends their employers' religious beliefs, claiming it was simply protecting the employers' religious liberty. Across the country, right wing extremists are seeking to empower individuals and business owners whose religious beliefs are offended by LGBT equality to exempt themselves from anti-discrimination laws — again, supposedly in the name of religious liberty. Conservative Christians aggressively seeking to deprive others of their legal rights regularly portray themselves as the victims of religious persecution.
People For the American Way has released a new report examining the many ways that religious liberty issues are increasingly coming up in public policy debates in communities across the nation. But this isn't religious liberty as it has been understood throughout our nation's history.
Authored by Senior Fellow Peter Montgomery, Religious Liberty: Shield or Sword? examines how the Far Right is working to transform this core American value from a shield protecting individuals' religious freedom into a sword that harms other people and undermines measures to promote the common good.
The report provides vital factual background and analysis to help readers better understand how religious freedom principles have traditionally been regarded, as well as how they are being twisted by a far right movement in an effort to reverse its fortunes as their substantive arguments are increasingly rejected by the American public. These distorting efforts come from conservative advocacy organizations, state and federal legislators, and even a narrow majority of the United States Supreme Court.
This report is an important tool to help understand and confront the Right in public policy debates across the country, as they increasingly seek to use religious liberty as a sword to deny rights to others, and as they continue to portray themselves as victims of religious persecution.
Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson has issued a coupleof statements over the past two weeks explaining that if Congress were to target his department’s funding in an effort to stop the enforcement of President Obama’s executive actions on immigration, a whole host of programs would be hurt, including “non-disaster assistance grants” to local law enforcement. This raised the ire of a Colorado county sheriff, who wrote a Facebook post calling Johnson’s remarks a “veiled threat” to sheriffs, which has since been picked up by many in the right-wing media.
Among those who are outraged by Johnson’s matter-of-fact statement on department funding is the American Family Association’s Sandy Rios, who claimed on her radio program today that the Homeland Security secretary is “threatening sheriffs." She also complained about a new DHS hotline that allows people to ask about the new immigration actions and report mistreatment by immigration enforcement, and about the fact that some undocumented immigrants who are now able to file federal tax returns will get refunds.
“Ladies and gentlemen, this is thug life,” she declared.
“It is thuggery. It is thuggery at the federal level.”