C4

Tony Perkins: No Religion In Government, Unless It's My Religion

Yesterday on “Washington Watch,” Family Research Council President Tony Perkins received a call from a listener who asked if the U.S. should pass a constitutional amendment that would restrict religious freedom if the faith in question had “political ambitions,” particularly if those ambitions were “subversive,” which, as Perkins confirmed later in the program, was code for Islam.

Perkins, who believes that the First Amendment doesn’t protect Muslim-Americans because Islam “tears at the fabric of our society” and is really more of an “economic system, a judicial system,” didn’t exactly deliver a full-throated defense of religious freedom. He said Islam “sees itself as a judicial philosophy, an economic philosophy” and wants to “impose” Sharia law “upon the surrounding society.”

Since his own organization promotes religious law, Perkins seems more intent on curtailing the rights of Muslims than preserving a secular government. In fact, later in the very same program, Perkins demanded that judges follow “natural law” on issues like abortion rights and gay marriage, which Perkins of course believes reflects his religious views.

“Natural law, which is what the founders recognized and built upon, that’s why the issue of abortion has not been settled, because it runs counter to natural law,” he said. “Natural law, which as Christians we would make reference to, as Paul said in Romans 2, it’s written on the hearts of men. Natural law says it’s not right for a mother to kill her unborn child. That’s why regardless of what the courts said, nine unelected judges, regardless of what they’ve said, the issue has not been resolved and it won’t be resolved. And the same is true for marriage, I don’t care what a court rules, I don’t care what a judge says, the issue of marriage, because it emanates from natural law, from creation, it’s going to be here and it will be an issue politically from here until as long as I’m alive.”

It’s odd for Perkins to criticize Islam for having “a judicial philosophy, an economic philosophy” at the same time as he is explicitly advocating for public policy to correspond to his own religious views. Perkins also believes that Jesus Christ preached capitalism, a claim he outlined in an article for CNN’s Belief blog, and the FRC regularly rails against judges whom they believe defy biblical precepts.

Perkins may also want to take issue with the Family Research Council’s favorite pseudo-historian, David Barton, who believes that “biblical principles” should be involved in economics and the judiciary: “You apply those principles to economic systems, you apply it to educational systems, you apply it to family systems, you apply it to governmental systems, judicial systems.”

Anti-Choice Groups Hope To End Legal Abortion Through National Strike

An Albuquerque anti-choice group that failed last year to pass municipal ordinance banning abortion after 20 weeks has come up with a new way to convince Albuquerque and all of America to criminalize abortion: a national strike!

Earlier this year, Project Defending Life, the group behind the Albuquerque ballot measure, launched a new project called Protest ABQ, aimed at recruiting anti-choice activists from around the country to converge on Albuquerque, the home of one of a very few late-term abortion clinics in the nation. Project ABQ is now announcing that, along with the anti-choice group Operation Rescue, it will launch a general strike to coincide with the anniversary of Roe v. Wade and the March for Life.

The groups are calling for supporters to “stay home from work, avoid buying anything unnecessary and basically be on strike” for two days later this month.

Protest ABQ’s Father Stephen Imbarrato explains in a YouTube video that this will finally be the strategy to end legal abortion:

It’s our hope that these protests will culminate in a national strike to end pre-born baby killing in the United States. While we’re marching in protest in Washington D.C. and San Francisco and Santa Fe and throughout our country on January 22, let us pray and fast and protest. Stay home from work, avoid buying anything unnecessary and basically be on strike to end this national pre-born baby killing. Let us extend this protest, this strike beyond Roe v. Wade day on January 22 to Friday, January 32. No work, no school, no spending, just prayer and fasting to end pre-born child killing.

An announcement for the strike calls on protesters to emulate Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (a supporter of reproductive rights) and warns that protesters could be “beaten, screamed at or abused”:

The yearly anniversary of Roe vs. Wade continues to be a day of mourning across the pro-life community. Each year thousands gather in Washington D.C. to protest against this evil.

However, to step up our call to end abortion, we are encouraging all like-minded people throughout the country not to go to work or school nor spend money on Thursday, January 22nd and Friday, January 23rd, 2015, but instead to join together for prayer, fasting and PROTEST in their localities.


All participants must commit to following the model of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. in their protests.

"Even if we were to be beaten, screamed at, or abused, we will not respond in kind," stated Fr. Imbarrato.

Protests will be held in front of state capitol buildings, busy intersections, and abortion facilities. No place is off limits and no one who profits from, supports, or condones pre-born child killing is immune from these protests.

Together, we are calling on national religious and pro-life leaders to join us and encourage all like-minded people to participate in a national strike.

Pastor Claims Ellen DeGeneres' Marriage Is Destroying America

Right-wing pastor and Christian Post columnist Larry Tomczak says he was “stunned and humbled” that Ellen DeGeneres responded yesterday to his recent incendiary anti-LGBT rant accusing the comedian, among others, of recruiting children into homosexuality.

Tomczak writes in his column today that he was merely trying to create a respectful and civil dialogue regarding homosexuality, before insisting that Ellen and her “partner” (scare quotes his) are harming children and their caregivers.

In fact, Tomczack claims, DeGeneres’ marriage and support for marriage equality will potentially doom “5000 years of Western civilization” and “the future of our nation” because marriage equality “opens the floodgates for other arrangements and legitimizes a lifestyle replete with dangerous, at-risk sexual behavior such as HIV/AIDS and over 30 STDs that are endangering lives, jeopardizing healthcare and impacting our economy.”

The conservative pastor insists that he is simply speaking the truth by condemning homosexuality, just like Martin Luther King, Jr. denounced racism.

Ellen, hasn't the time arrived for everyone involved in this dialogue on gay-related issues to lower our voices and approach one another with respect and civility though we have our differences? I know there's a lot of shouting and accusation and name calling on all sides of the gay debate, but how about you and I model something positive?



Remember the premise of my article was that Hollywood has a definite gay agenda and you're aligned with it. In 1997 you were on the cover of Time magazine declaring "Yes I'm Gay" after declaring it on your sitcom. You're an outspoken representative for the Human Rights Campaign "Coming Out Project" and member of the advocacy group PFLAG (Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays).

In the quote you shared on TV I want to reassure you that I never thought or implied that you were trying to purposefully influence young girls into lesbianism. Instead, my point was that, as an out and proud lesbian woman - probably the best known and most-loved in the world - you wield tremendous influence over these girls, and your influence is decidedly pro-lesbian. Wouldn't you agree?



Being 56 years old, childless and with your third "partner," you may not understand the awesome responsibility it is to shape impressionable and vulnerable children. I've done it with children and grandchildren plus helped parents for over 42 years with this most challenging task.

You once said, "I don't need a baby growing inside me for nine months. If I'm going to feel nauseous and achy when I wake up, I want to achieve that state the old-fashioned way-getting drunk the night before!"

Ellen, those of us raising children and grandchildren make lots of responsible choices to ensure the little ones entrusted to our care become productive, healthy individuals. In that spirit of kindness and compassion you advocate, give us the space we need here.

Finally, and this will probably be your biggest test with what I share, you obviously disagreed with the fact that I referred to your "marriage" in quotation marks. I am not trying to be offensive, yet appeal that you recognize truth can offend sensibilities of those choosing to reject it.

Ellen, a nation rises or falls on marriage. If we dismantle this pillar of society, as it has existed for over 5000 years of Western civilization and redefine it to accommodate other arrangements such as yours (or those advocating for polyamorous, polygamous or other configurations) what will be the consequences for this sacred institution and the future of our nation?

The true Christian Church must stand as a "sign of contradiction" amidst ever-changing cultural trends. With kindness and courage we must remain faithful to the truth, whether it is popular or not. We must honor a higher law than man, just as Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. expressed in his classic, "Letter from a Birmingham Jail" and is magnificently portrayed in the film "Selma."

In his song "Mercy," Bono stated that love is "charity and brings with it a clarity." So let me close by submitting to you with charity and clarity that marriage is and throughout history has always been the union of a man and a woman, regardless of what the courts say and regardless of how much you and Portia feel affection for each other. Here are just five of many reasons why gay "marriage" is morally wrong and cannot be called a righteous, authentic marital union.

1. It violates the clear and unambiguous moral teaching of the Scriptures, which serve as the basis for our Judeo Christian laws and foundations as a nation.

2. It is contradictory to the self-evident truths of "Mother Nature" or "Nature's God" (as our Founding Fathers expressed it) wherein men and women are designed and function differently, complement and complete each other, and through the wonder of marital union are able to procreate to perpetuate the human race.

3. It is contrary to the explicit teaching of every major world religion, which upholds the integrity of marriage and family.

4. It is an injustice and unequivocally harmful arrangement wherein our most precious entrustment, our children, are denied the love and nurture of a father and a mother who complement each other in a healthy family.

5. It redefines and devalues the sacred institution of marriage exclusively between a man and a woman, opens the floodgates for other arrangements and legitimizes a lifestyle replete with dangerous, at-risk sexual behavior such as HIV/AIDS and over 30 STDs that are endangering lives, jeopardizing healthcare and impacting our economy.

Ellen DeGeneres Reveals Her True 'Gay Agenda' In Response To Right-Wing Columnist

Last week, People For the American Way’s Right Wing Watch reported on a Christian Post column by right-wing commentator Larry Tomczak in which he warned that Hollywood is “promoting homosexuality” by “targeting innocent and impressionable children.” In particular, Tomczak attacked Ellen DeGeneres, whom he wrote “celebrates her lesbianism and ‘marriage’ in between appearances of guests like Taylor Swift to attract young girls.”

The column caught the attention of none other than Ellen herself, who responded to Tomczak on her show this week.

She told Tomczak: “First of all, I’m not ‘married.’ I’m married. That’s all,” adding “I don’t even know what it means to ‘celebrate my lesbianism.’”

She then revealed her true “gay agenda”:

PFAW

Nebraska Board Of Education Member Runs Racist, Anti-LGBT Blog

Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts started off his first term as governor this week by having to condemn a Republican member the state board of education, Pat McPherson, for running a conservative political blog that repeatedly referred to President Obama as a “half-breed.”

Ricketts stopped short of calling for McPherson to resign, as the board of education member pled ignorance and vowed to take down the blog. McPherson claimed that he did not write, or even read, the controversial posts on his blog, but refused to name the author. As the Omaha World-Herald reports, it is difficult to decipher who authored each post, especially since McPherson started attempting to scrub the website:

In all cases, the postings were unsigned.

McPherson said Tuesday that “on occasion” he may have posted anonymously to the site, but he said the controversial posts were not his.

“They weren’t speaking for me,” he said.

He said he usually signed his posts. A computer word search of the website turned up no articles indicating they were authored by McPherson, though the search may be incomplete because many of the prior postings had been deleted by McPherson along with the offending ones.

McPherson’s blog, as it turns out, has a lengthy record of posting offensive material.

In October, the blog posted a cartoon portraying Michelle Obama as obese and featured as its “thought of the day” a tweeting saying, “Barack Obama is what happens when Affirmative Action and The Peter Principle have a baby.” It also shared a birther joke: “Did you hear about the guy who managed to get into the White House without credentials? And then just the other day some guy jumped the fence.”

Other entries, as reported by the Aksarbent blog, criticized the “homosexualization” of the Boy Scouts and lambasted the government for “creating special classes for gays, lesbians, transgenders, cross-dressers, aka., queers and perverts.”

Another entry mocked the Lincoln public school system for trying “to make sure the littlest transgenders feel welcome at school,” adding: “The problem in our educational system is not a money problem. If anything our schools have access to entirely too much taxpayer money, if they can waste dollars on such foolishness..”

Another post likened gay marriage to bestiality: “I vote Democrat because I love the fact that I can now marry whatever I want. I’ve decided to marry my German Shepherd.”

Last year, McPherson’s outlet accused Warren Buffett, the Nebraska billionaire and philanthropist, of waging a “war on babies.”

In August, McPherson’s blog reposted a column by conservative writer Doug Patton saying that America is now worse than Nazi Germany thanks to gay rights and legal abortion:

What’s more chilling than a people oppressed by a Hitler, a Mao or a Stalin? A people that voluntarily oppresses itself, a reality that has now afflicted America.

We have watched over the last 40 years as American women have gone — willingly in most cases — into abortion mills to destroy one-third of a generation.

We have seen speech codes pop up on college campuses banning any conservative expression, and watched as so-called hate crimes legislation appeared on the books as the law of our land, a dangerous precedent if ever there was one.

Homosexual special rights groups have foisted their hateful rhetoric on us and cowered many into agreeing to support a same-sex “marriage” agenda that will fundamentally transform this country into something so perverse that none of us will even recognize it in 10 years.

The Religious Right's Obsession With Beyoncé: It's Not Just Mike Huckabee

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee attracted a lot of attention this week when he criticized the president and first lady for letting their daughters listen to Beyoncé's music – which in his new book he calls “obnoxious and toxic mental poison” — and wrote that the singer’s husband, Jay-Z, is “arguably crossing the line from husband to pimp by exploiting his wife as a sex object.”

Of course, Huckabee didn’t seem to mind performing a sexually explicit song alongside conservative rock star Ted Nugent on his own Fox News program…but that’s different!

While even former President Jimmy Carter has weighed in on Huckabee’s comments, the “War on Beyoncé” is nothing new among Religious Right commentators. Only Madonna has attracted greater wrath from the pundits we follow.

From speculating that Beyoncé is possessed by demons to calling her a “poor excuse for a wife,” the Religious Right has struggled to pinpoint just what it is about the pop star that they don’t like.

1. Sasha Fierce is a “demonic spirit” living within Beyoncé

After Beyoncé's Super Bowl performance last year, American Family Association spokesman Brian Fischer theorized that the singer’s persona Sasha Fierce was “clearly a demonic spirit” dwelling within her:

2. Beyoncé should be taken to an “insane asylum” for “demonic possession”

Right-wing radio host Kevin Swanson has a similar theory:

Charisma magazine similarly speculated that Satan had “twisted” Beyoncé to “use for his kingdom.”

3. Beyoncé is leading young girls into sex trafficking and death

Christian Post columnist Larry Tomczak, who made waves this week when he accused Ellen DeGeneres of using Taylor Swift to lure girls into lesbianism, warned last year that Beyoncé’s “seductively swiveling hips” were “causing men to lust” and putting her young female listeners on a “dangerous path” into sex trafficking…and maybe even death.

He also urged Michelle Obama to stop allowing her daughters to listen to Beyoncé’s music:

Now let's ask ourselves (not in any self-righteous manner but simply a prudent, mature approach): Is Beyoncé a role model? What message is she communicating to girls about relating to the opposite sex? Is she causing men to lust? Is the focus on virtue and inner beauty or seductively swiveling hips, championing a sensuality that can lead naive young girls on a dangerous path that could lead some even into sex trafficking?

Sex trafficking is a very serious problem in the United States. Remember, the average age of a young girl drawn in is 13, and scores are lured by pimps promising a glamorous life if girls will simply follow the seductive example of many celebrities whom they try to imitate. What follows leads to abuse, abortions and abasement-sometimes death. This is a national scandal in our generation. Proverbs 11:22 says, "Like a gold ring in a pig's snout is a beautiful woman who shows no discretion."

4. How is Jay-Z “different from a pimp?”

Huckabee isn’t the first Religious Right commentator to liken Jay-Z and Beyoncé’s relationship to that of a pimp and a prostitute. After Beyoncé’s performance at the Grammy Awards last year, the Illinois Family Institute’s Laurie Higgins penned a blog post lamenting the singer’s “soft-core porn performance” and accused the singer’s husband of acting as her “pimp”:

This past Sunday night's Grammy awards was a tragic freak show that demonstrated the entertainment industry's arrogance, ignorance of marriage, and disregard for children. It was a gawdy spitball hurled in the all-seeing eye of a holy God.

The spectacle was bookended by a soft-core porn performance by the not-single lady Beyoncé who twerked and jerked her half-revealed derriere in a series of "dance" moves that simulated sex and stimulated sexual appetite, while the crowd cheered in puerile excitement.

Beyoncé was later joined by her husband Jay-Z who seems to revel in the lustings of strangers for his wife. What kind of man gets pleasure from his wife's flaunting of her sexuality and from the certain knowledge that men desire to do things to his wife because of her arousing dress and actions? Is it money that motivates his eager embrace of his wife's immodesty, or pride that he has access to her body when all other leering men do not? If it's money, how is he different from a pimp?

5. ‘Beyoncé a poor excuse for a wife,’ will never find ‘a quality husband’

Suzanne Venker, a conservative commentator and niece of Phyllis Schlafly, was similarly outraged by Beyoncé’s Grammy performance, writing on her blog that Beyoncé’s “slutty behavior” made her “a poor excuse for a wife,” suggesting that she would never be able to find a “quality husband” that way:

There’s no wondering, Ms. Riley. Women like Beyonce aren’t just contributing to the problem—they are the problem. This isn’t a chicken or egg scenario. If women didn’t do what they do in the first place, men like Jay Z would have no opportunity to respond—poorly or otherwise. Classy behavior begets classy behavior. Slutty behavior begets a smut reaction.

Indeed, which means women haven’t really progressed at all—at least not when it comes to their personal lives. On the contrary, they’ve simply traded one kind of power for another. They may know what it takes to be successful in the marketplace, but they are clueless about the power women wield in love. Behaving as Beyonce does, or anything close to it, will not produce men who are invested in women. It will merely produce more Jay Zs, or “poor excuses for a husband.”

If women want a quality husband, they might begin by being quality material themselves.

Not everyone on the Right agrees with Venker, of course. In June, the conservative Heritage Foundation praised Beyoncé and Jay-Z as an example of a stable marriage and strong family — conveniently leaving out the pair’s strong support for marriage equality.

Erik Rush: Every Single Muslim Backs Terrorism, Hopes To Destroy Western Civilization

WorldNetDaily columnist Erik Rush, who last year called for all Muslims to be killed in response to the Boston Marathon bombing, writes today that every single Muslim on the planet is part of a grand plan to bring an end to Western civilization.

Insisting that there is no “distinction that exists between Islam and ‘radical Islam,’” Rush claims that “all Muslims are part of this diabolical design of supplanting Western civilization with an Islamic one” through the “violent subjugation of the host culture.” Terrorists who cite Islamic beliefs, according to Rush, “are not ‘radical’ jihadi commandos; they’re just Muslims,” while the majority of Muslims “advocate what the full-blown jihadis are doing.”

Naturally, Rush believes that President Obama is helping in this grand Muslim conspiracy to destroy the West through immigration, terrorist attacks and “Muslim-fomented civil unrest” by “furiously importing Muslims into the U.S.”

No sooner had reports of the horrific attack on the office of the Paris satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo by Islamist commandos coalesced last week, than politicians and media talking heads began qualifying their accounts with liberal use of phraseology intended to obscure the fact that these mass murderers were Muslims. In some cases, these parties do not wish to be labeled “Islamophobic.” In other cases, they are deluding themselves in there being some operative distinction that exists between Islam and “radical Islam.”

Islam has a 1,400-year history of not playing well with others – of executing the same methodology in subjugating nations across the globe as they are currently executing in the West. I believe that there are many people of good conscience who deny the truth about Islam because if they acknowledged it, they would have to accept remedies to the threat that would be distasteful to them.

The truth? Considering the character of Islam at its core, all Muslims are part of this diabolical design of supplanting Western civilization with an Islamic one, indeed, whether they believe it or not. Few may become full-blown jihadis, but rest assured that most of them advocate what the full-blown jihadis are doing – and polling data of Muslims clearly reflects this.

History has proven unequivocally that anywhere you have emerging Muslim populations in non-Muslim nations, once they reach an elusive percentage point in terms of their population (some experts say between 3 to 5 percent), many will “become radicalized” and set the course for violent subjugation of the host culture.

So why would any non-Muslim nation of sound mind allow the importation of Muslims into their society?

The answer? They wouldn’t.



Here, it bears mentioning that the people engaging in the foregoing antisocial behavior are not “radical” jihadi commandos; they’re just Muslims, nonetheless wreaking havoc upon European society.



Like the irrefutable reality of Islam being the wellspring from which violent jihad and Islamist terror flows (a no-brainer to most of you), the Obama administration’s dismissive reaction to the Paris rally ought not be a surprise, because Obama and his posse find all of this jihadi mayhem positively delicious. Has no one considered the possibility that Obama wanted to send a message to the world that the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists got what they deserved?



I have previously addressed in this space the fact that while it is being done rather quietly, Obama has been furiously importing Muslims into the U.S. – no doubt in order to reach that elusive percentage point of no return I mentioned earlier, whereupon ongoing Muslim-fomented civil unrest becomes inevitable.



I would add to that the necessity for Americans to acknowledge that a clear and present danger to this nation exists in the radical leftists, Islamists and sundry agenda-driven saboteurs who have insinuated themselves into places of power in America.

Tony Perkins Links Gay Rights Supporters To Charlie Hebdo Assailants

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins has compared conservatives in the U.S. to the victims of Nazi Germany and ISIS, claiming that LGBT equality advocates are channeling the two groups in their purported persecution of their political opponents. So now, naturally, Perkins is comparing U.S. conservatives to the victims of the terrorist attack on the Charlie Hebdo office in Paris.

On yesterday’s edition of “Washington Watch,” Perkins compared Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed’s decision to terminate the city’s fire chief — who had violated city employment practices by distributed to his employees a self-published book containing condemnations of homosexuality — to the Charlie Hebdo massacre.

“Look. What happened there in Paris was designed to intimidate and silence,” he said. “What happened here in Georgia, it wasn’t terrorists, it was a mayor; it wasn’t a gun he fired, but it was the chief he fired. And the intent was the same. It was to silence and to intimidate people of faith.”

Speaking at a rally yesterday in protest of the Atlanta chief’s firing, Perkins again equated Reed’s action with the violence committed by the Charlie Hebdo attackers. Perkins, incidentally, isn’t the first FRC staffer to make the comparison.

This past weekend, the world marched in Paris recognizing that free speech is the cornerstone of truly free societies. A realization is now sweeping Europe that political correctness has become lethal and it is an avowed enemy of true freedom. While many believe the satirical work of Charlie Hebdo was in bad taste and of poor form, we recognize the freedom that they had to speak without fear of reprisal or the threat of violence. Make no mistake about it, last week’s violent assault was designed to intimidate and silence others who would dare exercise that fundamental human right of the freedom of speech. But whether a journalist in France satirically writing about religion or a fire chief in Atlanta, Georgia writing about the sacred teachings of his faith, the silencing of either is a threat to the freedoms of all. The naked truth is that the actions taken against the chief are designed to send a message that will silence Christians and in effect force them to check their faith at the door of public service. My friends, we must not let that happen in the United States of America.

Alex Jones Envisions Paul-Cruz Dream Ticket: 'Rand Paul Is The Best'

Sen. Rand Paul has scored a big endorsement for his potential presidential candidacy…from legendary conspiracy theorist Alex Jones

Paul has appeared a number of times on Jones’s program and has said he relies on the “Infowars” host for information on the Bilderbergers and the “people who are promoting this globalist agenda," so it came as no surprise when Jones endorsed him for president yesterday, citing their years of friendship.

Jones’ endorsement came after an interview with the senator’s father, former Rep. Ron Paul, who warned of an imminent economic collapse and foreign calamities.

“Rand Paul is the best,” Jones said after the interview concluded. “I trust him. I’ve known him for 19 years and he’s the guy for president.”

Jones also had an idea for the candidate Paul should pick as his running mate: Sen. Ted Cruz.

“Ted Cruz will make a good VP," Jones said. "I’m telling you, Ted Cruz is getting more aggressive. That’s why, in polls, he’s now number one. In real polls, Ted Cruz has now taken the lead because he’s being aggressive and that’s what people want.”

The “InfoWars” host has previously boasted of his nearly two-decade relationship with Sen. Paul while cautioning that “he’s got a real shot at [the presidency] except for the electronic voting machine fraud.”

Louie Gohmert: Obama Blackmailing Petraeus Over Benghazi

The news that David Petraeus may face an indictment for leaking classified information to a woman with whom he was having an affair appears to have rekindled a right-wing conspiracy theory that Petraeus actually stepped down from his post as CIA director in order to conceal the truth about Benghazi.

This line of argument wasn’t exactly helped by the fact that Petraeus said Hillary Clinton would “make a tremendous president” and commended her “extraordinarily resolute, determined and controlled” response to the Benghazi attacks.

Or was it?

According to Louie Gohmert, in a speech on the House floor today, Petraeus is only acting as a “good soldier” because he is being blackmailed by the Obama administration.

“This administration knows that General Petraeus has information that would virtually destroy any credibility that the administration might still have nationally and internationally, so what else would this administration do but leave over his head for a year and a half the threat, ‘We’re going to prosecute you so you better keep your mouth shut,’” the Texas Republican said.

“So if you wonder why General Petraeus has not come out in the last year in a half and said, ‘No those weren’t our talking points, somebody that created them needs to be prosecuted, it was a fraud on the American people,’” he continued. He’s not going to say that, he’s got this administration hanging a prosecution over his head. What do you expect? I doubt he’ll ever be able to say it without worrying about something over his shoulder coming on after him. So here he is, he’s been defensive of the administration, he’s been a good solider, said what he’s wanted them to say, he hasn’t told all he could say and they’re going to make sure he doesn’t or if he does, he pays a heavy criminal price.” 

Essentially, according to Gohmert, if Petraeus says that the Obama administration didn’t do anything wrong in connection with Benghazi, that is proof that the administration did do something wrong. The congressman thinks that by not substantiating his Benghazi conspiracy theories, Petraeus has effectively verified them.

Louie Gohmert: 'I'm Not A 'Phobe' Of Anything'

Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, took to the House floor today to warn that “radical Islamic terrorists realize they’re winning” because the Obama administration refuses to blame Islam for terrorist attacks such as those that took place in Paris last week.

Later in his remarks, Gohmert once again suggested that President Obama is secretly a Muslim, citing an incident in the 2008 primary season when then-candidate Obama mistakenly said he had visited 57 states, which Gohmert contends was an accidental reference to the 57 members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. (The slightly more likely explanation for the verbal mix-up is that there were 57 contests in the Democratic presidential primary, but Gohmert is never one to be satisfied with the obvious explanation!)

But that was just prelude to Gohmert’s brave declaration that he is not a bigot: “I fear God, I don’t fear any man. I’m not a ‘phobe’ of anything, but it’s time to recognize truth and that is that radical Islamic terrorists want to destroy our way of life and kill us. It’s very simple.”

African American Ministers Call Anti-Immigrant Vote “Offense to Core Values”

In response to the vote by the House GOP to prevent President Obama from using his executive authority to address our broken immigration system, Minister Leslie Watson Malachi, Director of People For the American Way’s African American Ministers In Action, issued the following statement:

“Today’s vote is another deeply disturbing attack on immigrant families and an offense to our core values. Just as our history reminds us that America is a nation of immigrants, our faith reminds us that we’re called to welcome the stranger among us. This attempt to marginalize and harm immigrant families isn’t just contrary to our beliefs as Christians—it’s contrary to our belief as Americans that this country is, and must always be, a nation where people of all backgrounds can build a better life for future generations. We commend President Obama for standing firmly against this attempt to harm hardworking immigrants and their families who have made themselves a part of our shared community.”

###

PFAW: GOP Congress Continues Anti-Immigrant Attacks

Republicans in the House of Representatives today voted to deport DREAMers and prevent President Obama from using his executive authority to temporarily address our broken immigration system, threatening funding for the Department of Homeland Security. In response, PFAW President Michael Keegan issued the following statement:

“After years of bashing Latinos and other immigrant groups to appease their far-right base, GOP leaders are moving quickly to use their political power to put their anti-immigrant agenda into law. Today’s vote is a clear sign that extremists like Steve King and his ilk are still calling the shots in the GOP. Instead of passing legislation that addresses our immigration crisis, House Republicans prefer to attack millions of immigrants and their families who are working hard to build successful, stable communities in our country. President Obama should be applauded for standing up to the GOP’s bullying tactics and promising to veto this legislation.”

###

Right-Wing Radio Host Suggests GOP Congressman Is Inserting 'Islam Into Our Government'

As we’ve reported, an episode of the radio show “Fortress of Faith” that aired on American Family Radio this weekend alleged that President Obama is a secret member of the Muslim Brotherhood who tried to give billions of dollars to Hamas.

During the same program, host Shahram Hadian claimed that Islamists are taking over the U.S. government by organizing groups such as the bipartisan Ahmadiyya Muslim Caucus. Ahmadis are a minority group in Islam who have faced tremendous persecution, and the caucus was created to try to find ways the U.S. government can help combat such threats.

Hadian, however, claimed that the caucus’s establishment is proof that “Islam is getting into our government” and represents an Islamist influence operation.

When the caucus was founded in 2014, it was co-chaired by Democratic Rep. Jackie Speier and Republican Rep. Frank Wolf, who did not run for re-election last year. Interestingly enough, Wolf was one of the favorite congressmen of Religious Right groups such as the Family Research Council. Another group, the National Religious Broadcasters, even gave Wolf its “Faith & Freedom Award.”

But now it seems he was an Islamist all along, which according to this paranoid thinking, implicates the many conservative groups that worked with Wolf in the Islamic conspiracy!

Religious Right Radio Show Promotes Anti-Semitic Newspaper's Wild Obama Conspiracy Theory

Over the weekend, the “Fortress of Faith” radio show, a program aired on the American Family Association’s radio network, dedicated an episode to discussing an article from an Egyptian newspaper, Al-Wafd, alleging that President Obama is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. According to the show’s hosts, Al-Wafd, which has also depicted Obama as Satan, uncovered a supposed plot by Obama to give the Muslim Brotherhood $8 billion to transfer to Hamas, which would then use the funds to take over the Sinai peninsula.

Host Tom Wallace, who during the program got the name of Egypt’s president wrong, expressed disbelief that the U.S. media didn’t cover Obama’s (non-existent) ties to the group.

The Al-Wafd article has been widely mocked by experts as completely “ludicrous,” but the AFA hosts cited the article throughout the program as an “earth-shattering” report that could lead to Obama’s conviction for “high treason.”

As The Economist explains, the Egyptian media, dominated by allies of President Sisi, believes that the Muslim Brotherhood is a tool of the U.S. (to make matters more complicated, some Muslim Brotherhood supporters allege that Sisi and his supporters are themselves tools of the U.S.).

Not only is America calling the shots of the Muslim Brotherhood, their theory goes, but so is Israel, which several Egyptian media outlets have claimed is using the Muslim Brotherhood to divide and ultimately destroy Egypt. This conspiracy theory about a “Zionist-American-Muslim Brotherhood plot” and its “diabolical plan to divide and weaken Israel’s most powerful Arab neighbours, one by one,” has its roots in anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about powerful Jews secretly steering world events.

The newspaper lauded by the “Fortress of Faith” hosts, Al-Wafd, pushed anti-Semitic claims, including the notorious anti-Semitic forgery “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” in its Muslim Brotherhood-Obama exposé:

One manifestation of the current regime's de-legitimization campaign against the MB is comparing them to Jews and Zionists. The press associated with the regime has claimed that that the global MB resembles global Zionism, and that its schemes are the same as those of the Protocols. It has also claimed that MB founder Hassan Al-Bana was Jewish, as well as several other movement leaders. A number of Facebook pages depict MB members as Jews masquerading as Muslims, and feature images of [MB President Muhammad] Mursi in Jewish garb and MB symbols emblazoned with Stars of David.



In an “investigative report” in the daily Al-Wafd, Magdi Salama also argued that the MB was implementing the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and cited a few examples. He wrote: "Whoever reads the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which were formulated by the priests of global Zionism 116 years ago, and then scrupulously examines what the MB is currently doing in Egypt, discovers something grave: The MB is implementing the Protocols to the letter!

"In their Protocols, the Zionists are mainly concerned with destroying governments in every country, sowing the seeds of strife and quarrel in all countries and changing the [atmosphere] in the countries from one of tolerance to one of political and religious radicalism. This is precisely what the MB has currently undertaken to do in Egypt. The leaders of global Zionism stress the need to control people the way one controls herds of lowly cattle, to use their expression, so they can be moved around like chess pieces. This is precisely what the MB are doing by [invoking their] principle of hearing and obeying the movement's [General] Guide.

"The Ninth Protocol talks about deceiving the public with mendacious slogans, and this is precisely what the MB does with its sit-down strikes, [like those it held] in Raba'a [Al-'Adawiya] and Al-Nahda [Square], when it emphasizes that these sit-down strikes are on behalf of Islam and the shari'a and [constitute] sacrificing oneself for the sake of Allah, while in actuality this is political activity that is completely unrelated to religion or self-sacrifice on Allah's behalf.

"Those who were astounded by Muhammad Mursi's victory in the Egyptian presidential [elections] should read the Tenth Protocol of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, because it exposes the big secret behind Mursi's attaining the Egyptian presidency and also exposes the secret behind Israel's joy at Mursi’s victory. This Protocol says: 'We will prevent people with common sense from leading, keep them back, and never allow them to make plans of their own. The mob (so the Protocol says) has become accustomed to leaning our way [to the Jews]; we provide it with money in exchange for its obedience. By such means we will create a force so blind that it will never be able to reach any decision without the guidance of our representatives, whom we appointed to lead it'…"

BarbWire: Gay People See Children As 'Helpless Guinea Pigs'

BarbWire senior editor Jeff Allen hopes that the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals rejects the arguments of marriage equality supporters in its upcoming marriage rulings, writing in his column today that gay people are preying on children in order to advance their agenda and “self-serving desires.”

“America’s most vulnerable among us have tragically become the helpless guinea pigs,” he writes.

Allen also warns that marriage equality is leading to a “ghoulish ‘gay’ adaptation of The Island of Dr. Moreau gone horribly awry,” referring to the H.G. Wells novel about a scientist who tried to turn animals into humans.

He cited a brief submitted by anti-LGBT activists Robert Oscar LopezDawn StefanowiczKaty Faust and Rivka Edelman, who goes by B.N. Klein, who claim that they were harmed by being raised by same-sex parents.

Based upon nothing more than the self-serving desires of homosexual activists, marriage is being radically morphed into an unrecognizable monstrosity of its former self. It’s like some kind of ghoulish “gay” adaptation of The Island of Dr. Moreau gone horribly awry. And America’s most vulnerable among us have tragically become the helpless guinea pigs.

These eye-opening testimonials from the “quartet of truth” shed much needed light upon the devastating repercussions of the Left’s misguided social experiment in all its gory details. We must rein in this madness before many more children are forced to suffer needlessly.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals would be wise to refrain from acting like judicial oligarchs by overstepping their constitutionally-imposed boundaries. The justices should do the right thing and heed the voices of the victimized, who know firsthand what they’re talking about. A display of such exceptional legal restraint would actually be quite refreshing, and it’s long overdue.

The time has finally come to put the “prudence” back in jurisprudence.

Laurie Higgins: Marriage Equality Inherently Wrong, Just Like The Three-Fifths Compromise

Laurie Higgins, the “cultural analyst” for the American Family Association-affiliated Illinois Family Institute, defended the right of businesses to deny service to gay people yesterday by arguing that same-sex couples are intrinsically inferior to opposite-sex couples.

Since a same-sex marriage “is the antithesis of a marriage,” Higgins wrote on the organization’s website, businesses should be allowed to refuse service to anyone they “believe mocks real marriage and offends God.”

Legalizing same-sex marriage, according to Higgins, is much like the Constitution’s three-fifths compromise: “Just as legally construing a human as 3/5 person would not make him in reality only 3/5 a person, the foolish decision of foolish people to recognize legally a homoerotic union as a ‘marriage’ does not make it in reality a marriage.”

A ceremony that celebrates the union of two people of the same-sex is not identical to a ceremony that celebrates the union of two people of opposite sexes. Such a ceremony is the antithesis of a marriage, which is why many orthodox Christians will not use the terms “wedding” or “marriage” to describe the union of two people of the same-sex.

Calling a homoerotic union a “marriage” does not make it a marriage in reality. Just as legally construing a human as 3/5 person would not make him in reality only 3/5 a person, the foolish decision of foolish people to recognize legally a homoerotic union as a “marriage” does not make it in reality a marriage.

So, the request of homosexuals for a cake for their “wedding” is not the same as a request from a heterosexual couple for a cake for their wedding. Homosexuals are seeking to compel bakers to make a product for an entirely different type of event, and one which the bakers believe mocks real marriage and offends God.



Due to the astonishing influence of homosexual and “trans” activism and the unbiblical cowardice of Christians—including especially Christian leaders—we’re going to see the government increasingly making demands on Christians with which Christians ought not comply. It is during those times that Christians should remember that we are commanded to “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”

Fundraiser for Steve “David Duke Without the Baggage” Scalise Met with Protestors

PFAW members and other local activists lined the sidewalk outside of the National Republican Club Tuesday afternoon to protest a fundraiser event for House Majority Whip Steve Scalise.

Scalise, who was elected Majority Whip by his Republican colleagues back in June, has come under fire recently after it came to light that in 2002, he gave a speech to a white supremacist group affiliated with former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke. Scalise even has referred to himself as “David Duke without the baggage.”

Incredibly, even after these revelations, the Republican caucus—including Speaker John Boehner – is standing by Scalise. And Scalise certainly doesn’t seem to think this scandal is reason to slow down his fundraising efforts, as evidenced by the meeting his team held with donors on Tuesday, where PFAW members joined protestors from other organizations including Color of Change and Jewish advocacy group Bend the Arc.

It’s hard to believe that the GOP, which has struggled so much to reach minority voters, isn’t distancing itself from party leadership with ties to white supremacists. Republicans need to be held accountable – we need to ask our Republican representatives in Congress whether, in 2015, they are brave enough to take a stand against racism.

Thousands of PFAW members have already signed the petition calling on Speaker Boehner to remove Scalise from his leadership position. Add your name now.


Photo via The Hill

PFAW

Brian Brown Tells Moscow Conference: Americans Reject 'New And False Vision Of The Family'

As we noted just now, we recently discovered that the website for the international conference of social conservatives hosted at the Kremlin in September has posted a number of English transcripts of speeches given at the event, including those of a handful of American activists.

One of those activists was Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, who had previously testified before a Russian parliamentary committee in favor of tightening the country's laws  preventing the adoption of Russian orphans by same-sex couples.

Brown warned the audience in Moscow that “[i]n the West especially there is an attempt to silence those of us who stand for the truth of marriage” but claimed that Americans in general oppose LGBT rights. Lamenting that “there’s a picture that is sometimes painted of the United States as if all of us in the U.S. are somehow embracing this new and false vision of the family,” Brown said that it is “unelected judges” who are “coming and simply throwing away the votes” of Americans who oppose LGBT equality, violating “our civil right to have our vote counted.”

Brown told the conference attendees that he was hopeful for the future of the “international pro-family movement” that would “stand in a united manner against the attempt to redefine the very nature of what it means to be a human being.”

It is a great blessing to be with all of you here, in Moscow. I must say I am obviously an American, and I have eight children. We do exist, there are Americans with large families, but I never thought, and after talking to so many other Americans that are here today, I don’t think any of us ever thought that we would be here in Moscow, uniting together with all of you and seeing the leadership in defense of the family that we’re seeing in this country, and God bless you for that.

There are three things I want to discuss today. I want to focus primarily on what the future of the international pro-family movement is. Because what is occurring here, and what is occurring around the world, with leaders coming together, and meeting, and thinking, and discussing, and planning, and organizing, is a historic moment. We have an opportunity, we have been placed here to make a change.

Of course we see all of the bad that’s occurring. We see the countries that are embracing a false notion of marriage, we see the depressing and horrible rates of abortion in countries around the world; we see the negatives from what goes on in the media, what we see in movies. But there’s also a great good occurring, and great opportunities, and I think this moment in history is the time in which people from around the globe who understand the truth of the nature of the family, the truth of the nature of human dignity, the truth about what we need to do to protect the unborn, – we have an opportunity to band together, even in places that might seem unlikely, even in new relationships that we haven’t had in the past, to stand in a united manner against the attempt to redefine the very nature of what it means to be a human being. Because that in fact is what the redefinition of the family is all about.

So I think there are three characteristics of this new movement that we should embrace as we move forward. Number one – I think we need a boldness, a willingness to speak. In the West especially there is an attempt to silence those of us who stand for the truth of marriage; there is an attempt to punish donors who’ve donated to protect marriage in states like California throughout the country, to get their names in public, to try and fire people who are standing up for their beliefs, from their jobs, simply because they are standing for the truth of the union of a man and a woman.

At this point in history, it’s not enough to shrug your shoulders and say, “Well, I’m not going to deal with that.” We have to deal with it, we have to stand for the truth, we have to be bold.

At the same time, I believe we need a humility in our interactions around the world. What I mean is, much of our mass media is telling us things that may or may not be true, and it requires humility to work together with those that you may have differences on other matters, on the key issues of marriage and life. It takes humility to say that there are other countries that have stood up, and there’s something we can learn from them, especially if there’ve been other historic differences. I look at France, and I see one million people in the streets. We need to learn from France standing up for marriage.

It also takes humility that there’s a picture that is sometimes painted of the United States as if all of us in the U.S. are somehow embracing this new and false vision of the family. That is not true. The reality is that when the people of state after state have been able to vote on the definition of marriage, they voted to define marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Only in a few states has marriage been redefined. In 32 states the people have voted, even in California, to protect marriage as the union of a man and a woman. When the people have been able to have their say, they’ve stood up for the truth! The problem is that we are now in a position when judges, unelected judges are coming and simply throwing away the votes of all of these millions of Americans! We have to stand up for civil rights, our civil right to have our vote counted!

So I think that when talking about the United States it’s important to understand that there are many-many people that are working to protect marriage, that are working to protect life and don’t accept the changes that are occurring at the higher levels of government.

Finally, I think we need to be faithful. Our Lord said that we would be persecuted if we stood up for righteousness; we are going to be persecuted, it is going to take a faithfulness for all of us that when we are persecuted and when there are attempts to divide us, that we stand together for the truth! There are many issues on which we may disagree; there are many issues of geopolitics that there may be differences of opinion in this room, but what we are united on is the fundamental truth that is at stake in this century, and that is the truth of the beauty and dignity of marriage and family.

And I believe, instead of fear, or being depressed, or being negative, we need an optimism with our faith, to say that no culture can long stand that neglects or denies the truth, the simple truth that marriage is the union of a man and a woman. No culture can long stand that denies the inherent dignity of each and every human being. We need to proclaim this truth, be faithful, and I believe, it may take five years, ten years, fifteen years, even decades in the future. If we are faithful, we will make a change. But above all that, whether the change occurs or not, we are all called to do this. This is our mission, this is our duty, and it is our honor to be a part of it at this time in history. Thank you, and God bless!

World Congress of Families Spokesman: 'Russia Is The Hope For the World Right Now'

Back in September, a number of American activists, including the National Organization for Marriage’s Brian Brown , traveled to Moscow to take part in an international conference on “Large Families and the Future of Humanity” hosted at the Kremlin. The event, funded by a handful of close allies of Russian President Vladimir Putin, had originally been planned as the annual convention of the Illinois-based World Congress of Families, but WCF dropped its official sponsorship after Russia’s incursion into Ukraine led the U.S. to place economic sanctions on several of the Russian leaders involved in the conference.

Nonetheless, the conference went right ahead as planned, with two leaders of WCF — communications director Don Feder and managing director Lawrence Jacobs — attending in their personal capacities and speaking at an opening press conference along with two of the event’s top Russian funders, Natalia Yakunina (wife of Putin ally Vladimir Yakunin) and Konstantin Malofeev.

In addition, Feder and Jacobs both had the chance to give speeches at the event. Feder, never one to be shy about his extremism, posted a transcript of his speech decrying the “sexual revolution” on the conservative website BarbWire in October.

Coincidentally, today, just as Glenn Beck was warning his Religious Right allies against siding with Putin in his anti-LGBT crusade and blasting WCF for having “bought Russia's salesmanship that they are the new global champion of Christianity,” we came across the English transcript of Jacobs’ speech, which pretty much reinforces Beck’s point.

After being introduced by Yakunina, who called him “our old friend and ally in pro-family movement,” Jacobs heaped praise upon Russia’s leaders for resisting European trends toward LGBT equality and abortion rights, saying, “I think Russia is the hope for the world right now.”

“Russian Eastern European leadership, I believe, is necessary to counter the secular, post-modern, anti-family agenda and replace want I’m calling the cultural Marxist philosophy that’s destroying human society, in particular destroying the family,” he said.

The “radical population control people” and “the radical LGBT groups” are staging a “Marxist takeover” of the West through developments like legalized abortion, liberalized divorce law, and the abolition of “sodomy” laws, he warned, leaving Russia to lead the “spiritual battle.”

“I believe that now that you’ve emerged from the seventy years of oppression, culturally you are healthier than much of the West,” he said.

In particular, I wanted to just talk about why I think Russia is the hope for the world right now. In particular…really, to the importance of the future of the family and to the future of civilization.

Russian Eastern European leadership, I believe, is necessary to counter the secular, post-modern, anti-family agenda and replace want I’m calling the cultural Marxist philosophy that’s destroying human society, in particular destroying the family. I can’t think of a place that’s experienced the destruction of the Marxism more than Russia after seventy years of destroying the family and the church. So this is something, I think, all of you understand.

What is happening now is a cultural Marxism. You defeated communism here in Russia, but we inherited a cultural communism, a cultural Marxism. Many Western nations may have economic freedom, political freedom or democracy, freedom of speech, but they’ve lost the freedom of education and culture. Our culture has been taken over by the Marxist in America and in the West. Let me explain.

So where does this leave us, what is causing all of these problems that we discussed so eloquently today and yesterday, why is it that the family is under attack? Well, I believe that really the cultural Marxism and socialism has replaced communism as the new attack on society. Really, the socialist revolution in the West has been greatly influenced by an Italian communist that maybe you don’t know of, Antonio Gramsci. Right in the thirties, he said in particular about the culture of the West, “If we can take over the family and the church, we can remove the barrier what stands as robust obstacles to a communist economical and political takeover.” So what he was saying is, “Look, we don’t need violent revolution, we need a cultural revolution.”

He proposed the takeover of the cultural institutions, the destruction of marriage and family, and the church. This would achieve what I’m calling cultural political correctness, which is what we see, where the minority rules the majority. The majority of people believe that the family is the fundamental unit of society, but we’ve been taken over by a minority of people, sometimes less than one percent of the population, that produces their agenda and their values.

So, this means that socialists have been working tirelessly in the West, and this includes, you know, the radical population control people, the radical LGBT groups. They’ve been working on a takeover of universities and various socialist institutions, and taking over the education, the media, the churches, and destroying any structure that stands in their way, which is the family.

How has this happened? Well, they devalued sex, they devalued life, they devalued marriage. And ultimately, the destruction of the family has become the focus of these socialists and their leftist ideology.

This should demonstrate what they’ve been able to do through the sexual revolution. I call it a timeline of a cultural takeover of the family and the church, a Marxist takeover.

Unfortunately, some of this begins in Russia, in 1920, when the communists legalized abortion at all stages of a woman’s pregnancy. And it wasn’t just that particular moment in time. Of course, it was then the development of the technology of abortion and spreading that across Europe and across the world, to the United States as well.

Then, to go further, prior to 1930, all Christian denominations – Orthodox, Catholics, Protestants – all believed the contraception was wrong, that the pill or any form of contraception was against God’s will. That changed in 1930, with the Anglicans.

And as I go forward to more modern times, we look at the promotion of pornography, the legalization of the birth-control pill, no-fault divorce. You can see the gradual loosening of moral values, Christian values, until, in 1973, the US Supreme Court and their famous Roe v. Wade decision legalized abortion in the United States.

And then we went beyond abortion to same-sex marriage, legalizing that in the Netherlands in 2001. And in 2003, we struck down the sodomy laws in the United States, which opened up same-sex marriage. And now we have to worry about polygamy and all kinds of other forms of marriage.

So why is it that Russia can combat what has really been largely a revolution in the West? Well, because you understand what the Marxists can do to culture and to society. And I believe that now that you’ve emerged from the seventy years of oppression, culturally you are healthier than much of the West. And what you need to do, I think, is really continue to share the values that make Russia strong, that made it strong historically.

There is also a spiritual element to this. This is a spiritual battle, and, I think, members of the church in Russia, members of civil society should think about a way to reverse what happened in 1920. Clearly, if we can’t respect the dignity of human life, how can we do… We can see what happens. All these other things happen. So we need to make sure that we’ve reversed the legalization of abortion, but not just legally. I think, spiritually, there needs to be a repentance. There need to be an asking of forgiveness, not only in Russia but throughout the world, but I think Russia can lead this. Abortion started here, it can end here.

I believe, if Russia apologizes, takes responsibility and changes its abortion laws, and tells the world why it’s doing it, why the focus on the natural family, and life, and the dignity of human at all stages, it will lead in a counter-revolution to what we’ve seen in the sexual revolution that spread so many horrible values throughout the West. In fact, I think only Russia can do this.

One final thought. It’s obviously a spiritual battle, but there is also a philosophical battle. And so when the church, I believe, takes the lead on this issue of abortion, there is one additional area we can’t forget, and that’s the philosophical ideas of what we are doing. The spiritual part is the most important, and then what follows C. S. Lewis spoke about. You know, people as C. S. Lewis, the great Christian writer, Anglican, he was in England, they said… Once he converted to Christianity, they said, “Well, why don’t spend your time evangelizing people, telling people about the good news of Jesus? Why not spend all of your time…” He was, you know, obviously, very intelligent man and excellent orator – why shouldn’t he go into the ministry, for instance? And he said this. He said, “To be ignorant and simple now – not to be able to meet the enemies on their own ground, would be to throw down our weapons, and to betray our uneducated brethren who have, under God, no defense but us against the intellectual attacks of the heathen. Good philosophy must exist, if for no other reason, because bad philosophy needs to be answered.” And I believe, friends, that good philosophy must come from Russia.

Thank you.

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious