C4

Todd Akin Recounts Arrest at Anti-Choice Demonstration

At a 2011 “pastor’s briefing” with disgraced pseudo-historian David Barton, Congressman and Senate candidate Todd Akin (R-MO) recounted an experience of going to jail after protesting against abortion rights. Akin told the audience that he had earlier spoken with “a group of people who had been in jail with me” who were all “involved in the pro-life movement.”

“Don’t tell anybody I’m a jail bird,” Akin said, briefly telling a story about when “a bunch of us sat in front of these doors and the police gave us a ride to the free hotel for a while and you know how it goes.”

At the event with Barton, who has strongly backed his candidacy and has been campaigning with the embattled candidate, Akin was discussing biblical views on when to submit to governmental authority. Akin’s extreme views on abortion rights and rape are already well-known, but he only gave few details about his time as a “jail bird” during what may have been an illegal blockade of a clinic.

Watch:

Akin: Yesterday I spoke to a group of people who had been in jail with me, you know don’t tell anybody I’m a jail bird, you know, but there were a bunch of us that were years ago involved in the pro-life movement and the question becomes: the Bible says, ‘rescue the innocent that is being led to slaughter,’ so a bunch of us sat in front of these doors and the police gave us a ride to the free hotel for a while and you know how it goes, and the question is, is that biblical or not?

UPDATE: Akin confirmed his arrest at a news conference, as reported by the Associated Press. 

Republican Senate candidate Todd Akin said Friday that he had been arrested during an anti-abortion protest about two decades ago but didn't provide details of where or when the event occurred.

...

In a video circulating widely on the Internet Friday, Akin is seen discussing his involvement in an anti-abortion demonstration and says "you know, don't tell anybody I'm a jail bird." He also says in the video that "a bunch of us sat in front of these doors and the police gave us a ride to the free hotel for a while, and you know how it goes."

Asked at a press conference Friday in Kansas City to confirm the arrest, Akin said: "Yeah, well, certainly. Probably about 25 years ago or so I was involved in some peaceful protests. As I've made very clear I don't apologize for being pro-life. I stand up for the things I believe in."

His campaign promised to provide details of the arrest later Friday.

Issue #267,233 Romney Doesn't Get: Education

Mitt Romney took the stage at NBC's Education Nation to double down on his ridiculous past remarks that class size is "irrelevant" and "didn't make a difference." In light of Romney's remarks, American Bridge 21st Century launched ClassSizeMatters.com, featuring a great video and research revealing Romney's disastrous record on education.

From ClassSizeMatters.com:

Mitt Romney has said that "the effort to reduce classroom size may actually hurt education more than it helps." As governor, he proposed cutting $18 million in funding for class size reduction in Massachusetts. Yet when it came time to choose a school for his children, the Romneys chose an elite private school with an average class size of eleven students.

Mitt Romney wants small class sizes for his family -- but not for yours.

Learn more at http://classsizematters.com/learn-more/

 

PFAW

Horowitz: Obama 'Would Never Be President if He Weren't Black'

Far-right activist David Horowitz has been out promoting his new book, Radicals: Portraits of a Destructive Passion, and told conservative talk show host Steve Deace yesterday that President Obama, much like professor Cornel West, is taken seriously simply because he is black. During an incoherent rant, Horowitz asserted that Obama “would never be president if he weren’t black” as no one with the same “curious background and radicalism would ever have been nominated, let alone elected president if he weren’t black.” “Part of the racism of our society is if you’re black you can get away with murder,” Horowitz concludes.

Cornel West is just symbolic of the corruption of our culture and not unlike Obama who would never be president if he weren’t black, no white person with his resume and his thoughts and curious background and radicalism would ever have been nominated, let alone elected president if he weren’t black. So Cornel West is an empty suit who has twenty honorary degrees and he’s taught at all these prestigious universities but is basically an airhead, most people who’ve seen him on TV they’ve noticed. Part of the racism of our society is if you’re black you can get away with murder.

Later, Horowitz repeated his smear of Huma Abedin and said that she is a “Muslim Brotherhood operative” and the “chief adviser to the American government right now on Muslim affairs.” Not only is patently it absurd to claim that Abedin is a secret agent for the Brotherhood but she is also not a policymaker.

After attacking Obama as someone who “sympathizes with our enemy” and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as an ally of the Muslim Brotherhood, Horowitz said that conservatives are much nicer and more open minded than liberals. But he couldn’t even make that audacious claim without attacking Obama: “we don’t set out to destroy the character of people. Obama is a Communist.” Not only is Obama a Communist, Horowitz explained, but so are his advisers David Axelrod and Valerie Jarrett, whom he says all serve this “evil cause” with religious zeal.

Obama basically sympathizes with our enemy and Hillary Clinton’s chief adviser, the chief adviser to the American government right now on Muslim affairs is Huma Abedin, who is a Muslim Brotherhood operative. The Muslim Brotherhood, for people who don’t know, that’s the organization that created Osama bin Laden, it’s the parent organization of Hamas, and it’s agenda — well they’re already doing it in Egypt — is to turn it into an Islamic, fascist state, meaning that everybody is under Islamic laws, this seventh century law.



People have to stop thinking of them as liberals. Conservatives are liberal people, we believe in two sides to a question, we don’t shut people up, when we have channels on television there is more than one viewpoint, we don’t set out to destroy the character of people. Obama is a Communist. Stanley Kurtz has written a really good book called “Radical-in-Chief” and his entire life has been spent in the same left that I came out of, which is the radical, Marxist left. Only it’s even worse. [David] Axelrod, his family is all—they’re communists. Valerie Jarrett, I mean literally members of the Communist Party. And I know as somebody who came out of the left, you know if you’re involved with an evil cause and you leave it, you denounce it, you tell people, particularly if you’re a political person, you warn people. These people are really dangerous but they haven’t done that, they are still committed to this cause. I think that’s the main thing, people have to suddenly awaken and realize, and that’s one reason I wrote this book “Radicals” because it’s a portrait of this mentality, it’s a very religious mentality.

Bishop: Democrats Endorse 'Intrinsic Evils' and Supporters put their 'Soul in Serious Jeopardy'

The Roman Catholic Bishop of Springfield, Illinois, is warning that the Democratic Party has endorsed “intrinsic evils” and consequently, voters who back Democratic candidates have put their eternal salvation at risk. In the Catholic Times, the official newspaper of the Springfield diocese, Bishop Thomas John Paprocki uses the manufactured controversy about mentioning “God” in the Democratic Platform to argue that the Democrats are hostile to faith, and went on to attack Democrats for endorsing gay rights and opposing the criminalization of abortion. He said those two planks demonstrate that the Democrats “explicitly endorse intrinsic evils,” while noting that he has “read the Republican Party Platform and there is nothing in it that supports or promotes an intrinsic evil or a serious sin.”

Paprocki concludes with a warning that while he is “not telling you which party or which candidates to vote for or against,” backing the Democratic Party may put your eternal salvation at risk: “a vote for a candidate who promotes actions or behaviors that are intrinsically evil and gravely sinful makes you morally complicit and places the eternal salvation of your own soul in serious jeopardy.”

Watch:

There are many positive and beneficial planks in the Democratic Party Platform, but I am pointing out those that explicitly endorse intrinsic evils. My job is not to tell you for whom you should vote. But I do have a duty to speak out on moral issues. I would be abdicating this duty if I remained silent out of fear of sounding "political" and didn't say anything about the morality of these issues. People of faith object to these platform positions that promote serious sins. I know that the Democratic Party's official "unequivocal" support for abortion is deeply troubling to pro-life Democrats.



Certainly there are "pro-choice" Republicans who support abortion rights and "Log Cabin Republicans" who promote same-sex marriage, and they are equally as wrong as their Democratic counterparts. But these positions do not have the official support of their party.

Again, I am not telling you which party or which candidates to vote for or against, but I am saying that you need to think and pray very carefully about your vote, because a vote for a candidate who promotes actions or behaviors that are intrinsically evil and gravely sinful makes you morally complicit and places the eternal salvation of your own soul in serious jeopardy.

Blackwell: Obama and All Who Oppose the FRC are Building a 'Totalitarian State'

Ken Blackwell of the Family Research Council yesterday spoke to VCY America’s Crosstalk where he, like FRC president Tony Perkins, again tried to link both the Obama administration and the Southern Poverty Law Center to the tragic office shooting last month. But that wasn’t the only thing Blackwell told host Jim Schneider, as he also warned that all those who oppose the FRC and its mission are trying to form a “totalitarian state” and “destroy the family.”

Blackwell: We at the Family Research Council, we are a conservative Christian organization, we have answered the call, it’s a biblical call, in Psalms 11:3 the question is asked, if the foundation be destroyed what shall the righteous do? As an organization we have advanced these biblical truths, we defended them and as a consequence we have become despised by those who would recreate this country into something that its founders never expected it to be, and that is a big welfare state, a totalitarian state or an authoritarian state. In those models and the state-craft of those national models they’ve had to chase God and faith out of the public square and they’ve had to destroy the family as the basic unit of governance because they replace it with an all-powerful state.

The FRC senior fellow even agreed with a warning that the SPLC may start labeling churches throughout America as hate groups, based on the false claim that opposition to same-sex marriage was the reason the FRC received the designation, and suggested that President Obama and his allies are setting up the conditions for a “totalitarian” regime.

Schneider: If Family Research Council has been labeled as a hate group because of the position that you’ve taken on traditional marriage, that we have known since the beginning of this country, that thirty-some states have certified in their own constitutions, if FRC has been labeled as a hate group, aren’t we just a step away from our individual churches all across this nation being on this same hate list?

Blackwell: Oh absolutely. That’s why I started out by saying if you look at the various models of governance throughout human history we have shown in terms of a democratic Republic driven by constitutional governance that limits the reach and intrusion of government and puts an emphasis on individual liberty and is based on the fact that there is a moral foundation of this country, if you can compare that to totalitarian states, authoritarian states, big welfare states, there are a couple things that have had to happen for these states to consolidate power and use and misuse their power. They’ve had to destroy or weaken the family and they’ve had to run God and faith out of the public square, or at minimum they have had to silence the church. I don’t think it’s a step to far to say that this is a President that has carried out that strategy in the advancement of the reintroduction of the welfare state.

Ron Crews Calls Repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell a 'Grave' and Ominous 'Threat to Freedom'

Chaplains Alliance for Religious Liberty head Ron Crews yesterday in the Washington Times said that the new study which once again proved that the end of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell has had no negative impact on the military since the repeal was certified one year ago is mere “propaganda” that “should be shredded post-haste.” However, Crews does not even attempt to rebut the study or offer any evidence for why the report “has no connection to reality.” He did blame the repeal policy for one incidence of potential harassment and supposed uneasiness among chaplains who disapprove of homosexuality, and also inexplicably considered the performance of same-sex ceremonies on bases as an attack on religious freedom. Crews labeled the repeal a “threat to freedom” and an “assault on the constitutionally protected freedom of our service members” by turning them into guinea pigs for a “radical sexual experiment.”

The American armed forces exist to defend our nation, not to conduct social science lab experiments in which our troops serve as human subjects. Try telling that to this administration. The first anniversary of the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” Sept. 20, has come and gone. Now, there is mounting evidence that proves our warnings were not idle chatter. The threat to freedom posed by this radical sexual experiment on our military is real: It is grave and it is growing.

Activists inside and outside our government who pushed the repeal have deployed a smoke screen around the fact that once the military was forced to exalt homosexuality in the ranks, the all-too-foreseen consequence reared its ugly head.

Senior military officials have allowed personnel in favor of repeal to speak to media while those who have concerns have been ordered to be silent. Two airmen were publicly harassed in a Post Exchange food court as they were privately discussing their concerns about the impact of repeal. A chaplain was encouraged by military officials to resign his commission unless he could “get in line with the new policy,” demonstrating no tolerance for that chaplain’s religious viewpoint. Another chaplain was threatened with early retirement, and then reassigned to be more “closely supervised” because he had expressed concerns with the policy change, again demonstrating no tolerance for that chaplain’s religious viewpoint.



The Navy has allowed sailors openly engaged in homosexual behavior to choose their bunkmates. Imagine in this new age of “tolerance” if a sailor asked to be moved from a close-quarters berthing area because of his concern about another sailor’s sexual appetites. We already know what would happen, because tolerance has never been a two-way street.

Obviously, the recent “study” (aka propaganda) claiming that the repeal went off without a hitch should be shredded post-haste. It has no connection to reality.

This is just the first wave in the first year of the assault on the constitutionally protected freedom of our service members. Remember, the groups that forced their sexual experiment on the armed forces represent the lesbian, homosexual, bisexual and transgender community. It’s only a matter of time before a man who claims to be transgender demands to be placed with women during training, in the showers and in the barracks. The women in the units will have no recourse, especially if their objection to living, changing, bathing and bunking with a man is based on sincerely held religious beliefs. They would have two choices: Either accept this outrageous imposition silently or be charged with bigotry, hatred, intolerance and every other name the advocates of this agenda can throw at them. Neither choice is acceptable. When “sensitivity training” is in full force, these women just might face discipline and punitive separation merely for speaking up and requesting a reasonable measure of privacy and protection of their religious freedom.

Focus on the Family Election Special Claims US Government is Modeled after Biblical Israel

Focus on the Family president Jim Daly hosted conservative pastor Tony Evans to discuss the importance of voting yesterday, which Daly kicked off by claiming that just a single vote brought Texas into the Union, would have stopped Hitler from coming to power, made German a second language in the US and defeated John F. Kennedy. While of course every vote is important, unfortunately, Daly’s list is entirely false and based on urban legends.

Daly made sure to keep the program nominally nonpartisan but did discuss why evangelical voters should prefer a conservative non-Christian candidate over a left-leaning Christian and lamented the supposed tendency of African Americans to only vote only according to race. While it was already clear who Daly and Evans wanted listeners to support, they made their pitch more apparent when the two asserted that the current administration is quashing freedom and attacking Christians. Daly warned that government keeps getting “bigger and bigger and wants to take away more and more of our freedoms” and Evans maintained that there is an attempt “to remove God from government” by increasing its size and weakening freedom.

Daly: Going back to this idea when government gets bigger, our liberties tend to get smaller. The Founding Fathers were uniquely geared to understanding corrupt government and what happens when tyranny occurs. How do we guard against that in this modern day? It seems like nothing new under the sun is occurring and as government in the US gets bigger and bigger and wants to take away more and more of our freedoms, how do we actually respond?

Evans: I think the church of Jesus Christ has to rise up as a unit and say it is unacceptable to remove God from government, it is unhistorical, it is certainly biblio-centrically unacceptable and therefore we’re going to as responsible citizens raise up godly people to run for office; we are going to vote for people who have biblical value system to get into office; we are going to on the various levels of government make our voices heard; we are going to register our people to vote on Sunday after church; we are going to make a comprehensive statement that we are not to be denied as Christians our freedoms in America and we can argue clearly from the Bible on small government. You know 1 Samuel 8, He says if you elect a government of me it will expand, it is going to overtax you and it will take, take, take, take, take, and you will lose the freedom that I intended for you. That’s what is happening in America and that is why God’s people have got to vote for the right government.

Adding a dose of pseudo-history, Daly argued that the Founders established the US government according to the Bible and Evans said that the US is modeled after biblical Israel and the Garden of Eden.

Daly: Tony, as we look at the mandate in the Bible to vote there is so much there and the Founding Fathers again were brilliant in understanding God’s design for things and the Scripture is pretty clear and really the Founding Fathers in creating a Republic based it on their biblical understanding of God’s ordination of government, didn’t they?

Evans: Absolutely, they went right to Exodus 18, how Israel was organized as a representative government, and used that as a pattern for the government of the United States. The principles and the freedom which dominates the uniqueness of the United States is drawn right from Scripture, in fact freedom started with God in the Garden, ‘from every tree of the Garden you may freely eat,’ there was broad freedom, limited regulations and dire consequences, that’s how government is supposed to work, so whenever government gets too big it gets unbiblical.

Romney Says Teachers’ Unions Shouldn’t Be Able to Contribute to Campaigns, But Corporations OK

Stumping in Iowa last year, Mitt Romney famously defended the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, declaring, “Corporations are people, my friend.”

But it turns out there’s one group that Romney thinks should be prohibited from spending money to influence elections: teachers’ unions. Speaking at a forum in New York, Romney expressed his wish for one specific campaign finance restriction:

The bigger problem, Romney said, is that "the person sitting across the table from them should not have received the largest campaign contribution from the teachers union themselves ... [It's] an extraordinary conflict of interest and something that should be addressed."

He later added that "we simply can't have" elected officials who have received large contributions from teachers sitting across from them at the bargaining table "supposedly" to represent the interests of children. "I think it's a mistake," Romney said. "I think we have to get the money out of the teachers unions going into campaigns. It's the wrong way for us to go. We've got to separate that."

Romney’s absolutely right that large campaign contributions and expenditures can improperly influence elected officials. But if he’s going to apply that standard to teachers, he needs to apply it to corporations as well.

Share this image on Facebook:

PFAW

New PFAW Ad in Ohio

With just 41 days left to go before the election, People For the American Way is launching a new ad in Ohio to make sure that voters understand the dangerous impact of a Supreme Court appointed by Mitt Romney.
PFAW

Religious Right Extremists to Ride on the Todd Akin Bus Tour

Missouri Republican senatorial candidate Todd Akin is organizing a “Common Sense Bus Tour” following Newt Gingrich’s visit to boost the congressman’s embattled campaign. While Akin seems to have lost the support of major GOP figures after he said that it is extremely unlikely for a woman to become pregnant as a result of “legitimate rape,” he has consistently held the support of Religious Right activists who adore his ultraconservative views. Eagle Forum, which is based in St. Louis, sent out this invitation:

Phyllis Schlafly invites you to join her at first stop of the Missouri Common Sense Bus on Tuesday, September 25 from 2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. Renaissance St. Louis Grand Hotel Ballroom, 800 Washington Avenue St. Louis, Missouri.

You will find encouragement at each stop of the Missouri Common Sense Bus tour across Missouri. Each stop will feature some of Missouri's most well-known conservative leaders who are standing with Todd Akin for U.S. Senate.

With only a few weeks until the election, invite your friends and family to come out to hear why Todd Akin is the right choice to represent common sense in the U.S. Senate. Participants will vary by stop, but include the following:

• Phyllis Schlafly, Eagle Forum
• Dick Bott, Founder of Bott Radio Network
• Rich Bott, President of Bott Radio Network
• Don Hinkle, Editor of "The Pathway" and Director of Public Policy Missouri Baptist Convention
• Bev Ehlen, Missouri President, Concerned Women for America
• Pastor David Smith
• Buddy Smith, Executive Director, American Family Association

While it comes as no surprise that such far-right activists are rallying to Akin’s defense, here is why they may not help Akin improve his image among voters.

  • Phyllis Schlafly of Eagle Forum has repeatedly asserted that women cannot be raped by their husband and that marital rape is simply a myth, contrived by feminists, to get women to leave their marriages.
  • Bev Ehlen, the head of Concerned Women for America-Missouri, believes that gays should deal with discrimination just as “ugly” people do and even insists that “homosexuals molest children at ten times the rate of heterosexuals” and constitute the vast majority of child molesters.
  • Buddy Smith of the American Family Association has said that people “who are caught in this trap of homosexuality are in the clasp of Satan.”

Seeing that Akin has said that liberals hate God and warned gay rights will lead to the destruction of civilization, it is an unsurprising group of campaigners.

Randall Terry and Friends Hope to Bring Graphic Anti-Abortion Ads to Swing States

Operation Rescue founder and presidential candidate Randall Terry has announced another campaign, Operation Throw Obama Out, to run candidates for office so they can run graphic ads against abortion rights. According to the statement, Terry hopes to run ads that will be seen in swing states such as Colorado, Iowa, Florida, Virginia, North Carolina and Ohio.

Seven federal campaigns are poised to run withering ads against Obama in 21 states and the District of Columbia, including 7 vital swing states: Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, Ohio, Indiana, Iowa, and Colorado.

The TV ads show babies murdered by abortion, and Christians and Jews who have been murdered by Muslims -- Muslims who have received direct or indirect funding from Obama. The ads put the blame of this slaughter squarely on Obama.

Obama won in 2008 with 55% of the Catholic vote, and 35% of the evangelical vote.

Since that time, he has crossed swords with Catholic bishops and evangelical leaders by promoting the killing of unborn babies, forcing the Church to pay for drugs that kill the unborn, supporting "homosexual marriage," and funding Islamic terrorists that persecute Christians in the Middle East.

One of those House candidates is Andrew Beacham, an anti-Muslim tea party activist who heckled Obama during his address at Notre Dame, who is running a campaign ad (warning: graphic) in Kentucky and Indiana comparing Obama to Adolf Hitler and other notorious killers. “Obama gives your money to Planned Parenthood to murder babies and to the Muslim Brotherhood who murders Christians and Jews,” Beachem says while holding a cigar, “if you vote for Obama, the real question is, what are you smoking?”

Boykin: US Must 'Identify the Enemy as the Theology of Islam' or 'We Cannot be Victorious'

Family Research Council Vice President Jerry Boykin appeared on Janet Parshall’s radio show In the Market yesterday to do—what else?—whip up anti-Muslim animosity and spew bizarre conspiracy theories. He told Parshall that “Islam is not a religion” but a “totalitarian way of life” since, apparently, only “16 percent of Islam is a religion.” Boykin said that people need to act just like the Founding Fathers did in speaking up against the Muslim faith, citing Parshall, End Times fanatic Joel Rosenberg and others as courageous people who are channeling the Founders by attacking Islam and standing up to the “politically correct” elites!

Boykin: Islam is not a religion, now it has a religious component, 16 percent of Islam is religion, but the rest of it is a legal system, a geopolitical system, a military system, a financial system, it’s a totalitarian way of life and they say that. But our media and our leadership reject what they say about Islam so it’s incredible that we are just so politically correct and so afraid of these people. Where are the men of courage like the Founding Fathers that knew if they didn’t succeed they were going to be executed as being traitors, where are those kind of people today? Well you know where they are? They’re the Janet Parshall’s, they’re the Joel Rosenberg’s, they’re the people that are willing to stand up and speak openly about this stuff and take the ire of the media and critics.

Boykin also expressed his frustration that the Department of Defense will not “identify the enemy as the theology of Islam,” which Parshall said is just like trying to be “engaged in World War II without identifying the Nazis as the Nazis.”

Later, the former general later discussed the firestorm he caused in 2003 when he delivered speeches in uniform arguing that the US was at war against Islam and that Muslims worship an “idol.” He was reprimanded the following year by President Bush and found to have breached military regulations.

Always one to play the martyr-card, Boykin said he was simply attacked by the media for “my Christian faith” and “for boldly proclaiming that our real battle was not against the Taliban or the Al Qaeda but was a spiritual battle.” “When you expose Satan you must expect a reaction,” Boykin said, even alleging that his First Amendment rights were undermined. But while he told Parshall that he didn’t care what his critics said, Boykin actually apologized for his comments at the time.

Parshall: I shake my head, if you’re going to be even a passive student of history, how would we have ever engaged in World War II without identifying the Nazis as the Nazis? You’re military, teach us, how would you be able to defeat an enemy without rightfully identifying the enemy and it seems in this country we’re loath to identify the enemy.

Boykin: Sun Tzu, the great Chinese warrior and philosopher, said know your enemy and know yourself and you need not fear a thousand battles. I was so frustrated while I was in the Department of Defense because I kept trying to impress upon them that we have to identify the enemy as the theology of Islam and those people that are rabid adherents to the theology are the enemy. But no one would accept that and I was told to go sit in a corner and nobody wanted to hear it. Obviously now some are starting to get it; we cannot be victorious if we can’t identify the enemy.



Boykin: The worst period was 2003 when I was the front story on every news program and every newspaper for my Christian faith and for boldly proclaiming that our real battle was not against the Taliban or the Al Qaeda but was a spiritual battle and that certainly did not sit well. I also said that our real enemy in what we’re dealing with is Satan, you know when you expose Satan you must expect a reaction. So I took quite a beating for quite a while and I was devastated by it, I must tell you, the First Amendment that I protected for over three decades at that time, only to have the media turn on me, but you know what I’m a lot tougher now as a result of it and I don’t really care what they think because ultimately I answer to God and not to man.

An Elderly Woman Grapples with Pennsylvania’s Voter ID Law

In March, Pennsylvania’s governor signed one of the most restrictive voter ID laws in the country. One study estimated that the law could impose extra burdens on 700,000 Pennsylvania voters, disproportionately affecting the poor, minorities, students and the elderly.

Andrew Cohen at The Atlantic writes today about one Pennsylvanian in her 80s who is struggling to keep her right to vote, sixty years after casting her first vote for Adlai Stevenson. Cohen quotes a letter that Robin Kane wrote to the voter ID law’s sponsor about her efforts to help her elderly mother, Jaqueline, register to vote in Pennsylvania:

For the past two weeks, my sister and I have been trying to help my mother gather the appropriate documents to get the newly required photo ID. The education campaign had inaccurate information and the rules keep shifting, making it difficult for me to understand and it would have been impossible for my elderly mother to do this without assistance.

First, VotesPA and PennDOT websites said she would need to get a non-driver's photo license. To do so, she would need her social security card; an original birth certificate with a raised seal; two proofs of residency; an application; and an oath that she had no other form of ID. My sister and mother spent two days looking for her birth certificate from 1930. They found my dead grandmother's birth certificate, plus ration cards from World War II, and lots of documents of my father's service during that war. But not her birth certificate.

I returned to the websites to learn that even without a birth certificate, she might be able to get the photo ID if the state Department of Health could confirm her birth. However, my mother was born in NY, not Pennsylvania. So, it turned out, this solution didn't apply to her. Instead, I was directed to seek a new birth certificate from the state of New York. Just when I thought we couldn't possibly get this done in time for her to vote, I learned that there is a new option for people exactly like my mom: the new, Department of State photo id for voting.

It still requires her to have her a social security card or number (which we found); proof of residency; an application; and an oath. And it still requires that my 82-year-old mother will travel by bus to a PennDOT office and hope that she has the stamina to wait in multiple lines to complete the process to get a photo ID that she needs for only this one purpose, ever. But she is determined to do so, if she is able. And she will vote against anyone who sided with you in this effort to suppress legitimate votes.

Cohen writes:

What this really means is that Jacqueline Kane is one of the lucky ones. She has a family that has the means to be able to help her in this fashion. But think of all the other elderly people out there, who won't have a health aid with them, or who don't have access to a bus, or who don't live in elder-care facilities where such opportunities exist. Those people aren't lazy, either. And yet they clearly face disenfranchisement if this law is permitted to stay in effect.

While Kane and countless others in Pennsylvania struggle to meet the voter ID requirement before election day, it’s still unclear whether the law will take effect in November. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently returned a challenge to the law to a lower court, ordering the lower court to halt the law if it’s not convinced the voter ID requirements won’t disenfranchise anybody.

PFAW

Focus on the Family Lists Homosexuality alongside Rape and Adultery as Signs of 'Brokenness'

Ex-gay activist and Focus on the Family analyst Jeff Johnston is launching a new group, with Focus’s blessing, focused on sexual orientation conversion therapy in the wake of criticisms of the tactic by Exodus International’s Alan Chambers. Johnston says that Satan is responsible for the “sexual brokenness” found in gays and lesbians and that their sexual orientation is a result of poor parenting and molestation. Today, Johnston posted on an article on Focus’s political arm CitizenLink where he mocked homophobia and heteronormativity as rare, ridiculous and unfounded, comparing the LGBT rights movement to a campaign of people with deteriorating eyesight who stop wearing their eyeglasses, even if that means causing accidents while driving, in protest of “binocular-normativity.” He lambasted LGBT rights advocates for having people be “defined” by “their brokenness,” saying that homosexual and transgender people are just more signs of the world’s “brokenness,” just like rape, adultery and STIs.

Aside from my own near-sightedness, astigmatisms and presbyopia, three family members have lost an eye – for a variety of unrelated reasons. Two of them wear prosthetic eyes. Yet everywhere I look, it is a two-eyed world. When was the last time you saw someone on television take out his prosthetic eye? My family started a campaign; you may have seen some of our bumper stickers: “Monoculars Unite!” “Blind is Good!” “End Binocular-Normativity!”

Textbooks should show more people with no eyes or one eye – why do they all assume people have two eyes? Kids with glasses get teased and called “four eyes.” Our national anthem is an insult – no, I can’t “see by the dawn’s early light” – until I fumble around and find my glasses. I spent a month protesting 20/20-vision-normativity by not wearing my glasses. After a couple car accidents, my wife made me put them on again. People with good vision don’t have to spend thousands of dollars over their lifetime for glasses, contacts, prosthetic eyes, LASIK, cataract surgery, seeing-eye dogs or learning braille. It’s just not fair.



Aside from nature and culture, God has also revealed his truth for our sexuality in the Bible. We go back to the words of Genesis – affirmed by Jesus in the Gospels – and read that God created us male and female in his image. Things are defined by their perfection, by what they are supposed to be, not by their brokenness. So we don’t redefine God’s creation or gauge how we should live by the broken sexuality we see around us: adultery, pornography, sexually-transmitted infections, HIV/AIDS, abortion, infertility, transgenderism, homosexuality, misogyny, lust, divorce, rape.

Same-sex lusts, fantasies and sexual activity violate God’s male-female design in a unique way. Instead of normalizing brokenness, calling homosexuality “good,” and identifying people by their sexual attractions, those who follow Jesus are called to bring redemption, grace and transformation.

Similarly, our sexuality and relationships have been dreadfully impacted by sin. Many of us under-estimate the power and effects of sin; we don’t understand how what Dallas Willard calls “radical evil in the ruined soul” has affected our sexuality and relationships. Sin devastates lives. And sexual sin, because sexuality is so good, so powerful, and such a deep part of our being, is especially destructive.

Even in our sexual brokenness, we see glimmers of God’s design. One of those glimmers is that though humans have the capacity for all kinds of sexual behaviors, and despite sin, the world is largely heteronormative – and not arbitrarily so. Most cultures recognize the truth displayed in our bodies, that humanity is divided into two sexes, male and female. And almost all have some form of marriage – mainly to keep children with the husband and wife who procreated them.

Harry Jackson Cites Dubious Studies to Claim Gay Parents Harm Children

Trying to boost his campaign to generate a voter rebellion against Democrats over the issue of marriage equality, Harry Jackson wrote in his column today that legalizing same-sex marriage would harm children. He asserts that gay couples who seek to become parents “put their own fleeting desires ahead of the God-given rights of their children,” whose children he says are more likely to be gay, depressed, unemployed or drug users. Jackson cited the work of Walter Schumm of Kansas State University to back up his claims, but Schumm’s work has been roundly criticized and he is closely tied to anti-gay crackpot Paul Cameron of the Family Research Institute. Later, Jackson mentioned the notorious Mark Regnerus study as part of his warning against gay parenting. What Jackson fails to mention, however, is that even the journal that published his report recently admitted that it was severely flawed, noting that just two of the respondents actually “lived with a lesbian couple for their entire childhoods, and most did not live with lesbian or gay parents for long periods, if at all.”

The reason that legally defined marriage is important is because of children. It takes a mother and a father to conceive a child, and children have a God-given right to have a relationship with both their biological mother and their biological father. Children also have a God-given right to have both a male role model and a female role model in their homes. There are certainly times when tragedy takes a parent from a child, but what about the much more frequent times when adults put their own fleeting desires ahead of the God-given rights of their children? Desires change, as the breakups of both heterosexual and homosexual relationships testify.

As our nation continues to wrestle with the meaning and precise definition of marriage Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered activists consistently dismiss the issue of children. Same-sex marriage advocates insist that children of homosexual couples have the same or better outcomes than children of heterosexual couples. Unfortunately for them these assertions are based more on philosophy than hard science. For example, a 2010 study by Dr. Walter Schumm of Kansas State University confirmed that adult children raised by homosexual couples are (unsurprisingly) two to five times as likely to identify themselves as homosexual as children of heterosexuals. But the nation is divided as to whether that is an important outcome or not.

More specifically, whenever the topic of children reared by gay parents is raised: the assertion is made that there are no special problems or disadvantages because of their parents’ choices of “partners.” But this image (if remotely true) represents a tiny, disproportionately wealthy fraction of the gay population. Most of the scientists who have researched the children of such families admit as much.

Common sense would remind us that the results of any particular study depends both on how one defines a household headed by an LGBT couple, and what factors one evaluates when looking at “outcomes.” Dr. Mark Regnerus of the University of Texas, Austin, recently set out to hear the stories of the adults living in America today who were raised by parents in homosexual relationships. LGBT activists have fought vigorously to malign and suppress his findings. In short, he learned that, on 25 of 40 different outcomes evaluated, the children of women who’ve had same-sex relationships fare quite differently than those in stable, biologically-intact mom-and-pop families, displaying numbers more comparable to those from heterosexual stepfamilies and single parents.

This study included controls for age, race, gender, and the impact of being bullied as a youth, or the gay-friendliness of the state in which they live. Yet the respondents of same-sex parents were more apt to become unemployed, be less healthy and more depressed. They also were more likely to have cheated on a spouse or partner, have more male and female sex partners, experience more sexual victimization, and were more likely to reflect negatively on their childhood family life. Those raised by same-sex couples also were more likely to smoke marijuana and have trouble with the law.

At this point in our nation, no one is debating the right of consenting adults to do what they wish with each other in private. But redefining the ancient institution of marriage is an entirely different matter. This will set the stage for more and more children to grow up without a mother or a father, simply to placate the desire of adults. We must fight to preserve the traditional definition of marriage for the sake of these children.

Janet Porter Pushes Ohio State Senate to Vote on 'Heartbeat Bill' before Election

Faith2Action’s Janet Porter believes that her prized Heartbeat Bill, which would criminalize nearly all abortions, may soon receive a vote in the GOP-controlled Ohio State Senate. The bill already passed the House but has been held up in the State Senate, leading Porter to embark on a campaign to drive out Republicans who didn’t want to put the bill up for a vote and bring together Religious Right activists to pray for the bill’s passage.

According to a letter sent to supporters earlier this month [PDF], Porter said that her bill may receive a vote in the Senate before the general election in November. Of course, Porter has predicted the passage of her bill in Ohio and other states many times before, and she is organizing another prayer rally in the Statehouse Atrium on October, 28.

Dear Friend of Faith2Action,

Since you last heard from me, we've entered a critical new phase in the Heartbeat Bill – one that has involved intense behind-the-scenes negotiations with former opponents of the bill and much prayer and fasting! I am absolutely amazed: it appears that God is doing the miraculous again by turning former Heartbeat Bill opponents into allies! I believe we are finally reaching the point of breakthrough.

As I write this, the final changes to an agreed-upon "compromise bill" are being drafted—without losing the vital legal protection for babies. In some ways, this new version is even stronger than the original thanks to countless hours of painstaking work by some of the nation's leading pro-life attorneys.

This revised, mutually acceptable bill will be presented to leaders in the Senate this week and we are asking for a vote on the Heartbeat Bill on the floor of the Ohio State Senate, before the election!

The good news: This agreed-upon bill is a huge step toward a floor vote and the most important breakthrough since it passed the House more than a year ago. We are now just inches away from effectively ending abortion in Ohio!

The bad news: We've gone to the mat many times in the past for causes we believed in, but never before in our decade-long history have our resources been this depleted. Getting the Heartbeat Bill to this point has literally taken everything we have personally and as a ministry. We've spent our personal savings, gone without salaries and poured everything we had into getting our message out to the pro-life voters, prayer warriors and senators of Ohio.

Our campaign to publicly hold our senators accountable for their inaction included tens of thousands of postcards, weekly press releases, robo-calls, newspaper ads, rallies, emails, and flyers. And it worked! We give God all the glory for this. And I personally want to thank our loyal supporters like you who make our work possible.

William Murray: Obama is Waging a 'Jihad against Non-Islamic Religious Groups – Both Jews and Christians'

Religious Right activist William Murray, who leads both the Religious Freedom Coalition and the Government Is Not God Political Action Committee (GING-PAC), is using GING-PAC to post advertisements in newspapers across swing states. According to Murray, “Barack Hussein Obama and Hillary Clinton love the Muslim Brotherhood” and “Obama is carrying on what amounts to a Jihad against non-Islamic religious groups – both Jews and Christians.” “Obama is waging a war on religious liberty,” Murray writes, “but he’s stopped waging a war on Islamic terrorism here and around the globe.”

In a fundraising solicitation for the newspaper advertisements [PDF], which warn that Obama will force chaplains to perform same-sex marriages and bring Sharia law and the Muslim Brotherhood into government, Murray claims that Obama will use “voter fraud so they can stay in power” and pursue “his unrestrained support for radical Islam.” Murray calls Obama a “dangerous racist” and the “most racially divisive” president in American history who is out to destroy the country.

GING-PAC needs your help to stop him from winning another four years in the White House – where he will continue his aggressive assault on religious liberty – and his unrestrained support for radical Islam – both here in the U.S. and around the globe.

You can help us run newspaper advertisements in key states to defeat Barack Obama’s anti-religious, pro-Islamist agenda in November!

We are less than 90 days before the most important election in the history of our nation since 1865! A lot is at stake! And I’m sure you understand the severity of what we are facing!

Clearly, Obama is the most dangerous racist, pro-abortion, pro-gay, pro-Islam and anti-capitalist president who has ever occupied the White House – and he’ll try any dirty trick in the book to win this November’s election. That’s why he’s got Attorney General Eric Holder suing states that are trying to implement voter ID laws. Obama and Holder want voter fraud so they can stay in power.

Holder is suing states trying to have honest elections – but he dropped the serious case of voter intimidation against members of the New Black Panther party who were intimidating white voters in Philadelphia during the 2008 election!

Obama is not only the most viciously anti-religious president in history, but he’s turning out to be the most racially divisive one as well. In fact, he seems to deliberately try to provoke racial animosity. When he was running for office in 2008, he claimed to be a post-racial candidate. He lied.

Once he’s back in office, he’ll be totally unrestrained in his plans to bring our nation to moral and economic ruin. He’s already done a pretty good job. Imagine what he’ll do in four more years.

Mitt Romney's Supreme Court Time Machine

PFAW video shows Romney's agenda for the Supreme Court is too extreme for America. Under his presidency, the future of the Court is looking pretty backwards.
PFAW

Joel Gilbert: ‘”Change” is a Code Word for a Revolution to End Capitalism’

Joel Gilbert, the filmmaker behind the theory that President Obama inherited a Marxist worldview from his “real father” Frank Marshall Davis – a theory adopted this week by the chairman of the Alabama Republican Party -- spoke last month with right-wing radio host Michael Savage.

Gilbert told Savage that Obama’s 2008 “Change” slogan was actually “a code word for a revolution to end capitalism” and assured listeners that by the end of his second term, the president will “achieve what he wants, which is to make America irreversibly socialist.” Part of this transformation, Gilbert said, is that “the middle class’ health care is going to be given away to poor and illegals.”

Savage: How is Obama’s campaign different this time around?

Gilbert: Well, what’s different is he was being very general and vague about ‘hope and change’ and everybody just read into it what they wanted, nobody really knew what ‘change’ meant from the socialist point of view. ‘Change’ is a code word for a revolution to end capitalism. Now his Marxist ideology is just coming through loud and clear. His entire campaign is based on the top one percent, of the breathtaking greed of a few. He talks about how the rich don’t pay their fair share. Well, anybody can just Google it and see that the top income brackets do pay up to 40 percent of income and it kind of goes down from there. So his entire campaign is based on this lie, this absurd notion that we don’t have a fair tax system. But this is the classic Marxist rhetoric that Obama would have gotten during this indoctrination from his real father, Frank Marshall Davis.

Gilbert: National healthcare is simply a socialist tool to eliminate the middle and upper classes. So for Obama, poor quality, long waits and high taxes in this national health care doesn’t matter. It’s just a socialist tool. For Obama in the next term, the middle class’ health care is going to be given away to poor and illegals. Middle class’ employers are going to be taxed and regulated out of business. And the middle class’ retirement will evaporate into a bankrupt, socialist state, and Obama will achieve what he wants, which is to make America irreversibly socialist without anyone ever realizing how it happened.

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious