In an interview with WorldNetDaily published today, Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly weighed in on the unfounded theory gaining traction in the right-wing media that Central American young people are to blame for an outbreak of a childhood respiratory illness in the U.S.
“There are all kinds of diseases in the rest of the world, and we don’t want them in this country,” Schlafly told WND, adding that “of all the things [Obama has] done, I think this thing of letting these diseased people into this country to infect our own people is just the most outrageous of all.”
She went on to imply that President Obama is intentionally allowing people infected with Ebola into the United States because he wants America to be “just like everybody else, and if Africa is suffering from Ebola, we ought to join the group and be suffering from it, too. That’s his attitude.”
Conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly – author of “Who Killed the American Family?” – said she agrees Obama is responsible for allowing diseases to enter the country.
“There are all kinds of diseases in the rest of the world, and we don’t want them in this country,” Schlafly said. “And it’s Obama’s job to keep them out.
“Out of all the things he’s done, I think this thing of letting these diseased people into this country to infect our own people is just the most outrageous of all.”
Schlafly said the government should screen immigrants for disease before they enter the country, as was done at Ellis Island a hundred years ago.
“That was the purpose of Ellis Island – to have a waiting place where it was decided whether people were healthy enough or responsible enough to come into our country,” she said. “The idea that anybody can just walk in and carry this disease with them is just an outrage, and it is Obama’s fault because he’s responsible for doing it.”
When asked why the current administration hasn’t done more to prevent diseased illegal aliens or Ebola carriers from Africa from entering the country, Schlafly said Obama wants to make the U.S. more like the rest of the world.
“Obama doesn’t want America to believe that we’re exceptional,” Schlafly said. “He wants us to be just like everybody else, and if Africa is suffering from Ebola, we ought to join the group and be suffering from it, too. That’s his attitude.”
WorldNetDaily commentator Erik Rush insists in his column today that he is just asking the question: Does President Obama intend “to facilitate an Ebola outbreak in the United States? Will his efforts to protect Americans from this dread disease be as ineffectual and insincere as his war against ISIS?”
Rush writes that the president is not an “unluckly, incompetent or intellectually compromised” leader, as in fact “the individual representing himself as Barack Hussein Obama is a malignant saboteur, harboring allegiances that are in conflict with his role as our president.”
According to Rush, Obama is an “incomprehensibly diabolical individual” who hopes to create an Islamic caliphate and allow members of terrorist groups to enter the United States. Following this train of thought, Rush insists that it is only reasonable to wonder if Obama is hoping to spread Ebola in the U.S.
I’ve said before (and I am by no means the only one) that it would be statistically impossible for an individual to be sufficiently unlucky, incompetent, or intellectually compromised that their policies would overwhelmingly result in disaster after disaster. Unfortunately, we’ve cultivated a population wherein there are individuals among us so mind-blowingly stupid that they believe travel restrictions imposed on Ebola-stricken nations would be racist. Thus, there are plenty of folks who still buy into the “Obama as the good-natured bungler” narrative – sort of a Steve Urkel with a pen and a phone.
While I have breath, however, I will continue to affirm that the individual representing himself as Barack Hussein Obama is a malignant saboteur, harboring allegiances that are in conflict with his role as our president.
Obama used political correctness as a pretext for failing to control our southern border. It was viewed as imprudent, but his intention was to overwhelm the system, thus allowing massive numbers of illegal immigrants and potential terrorists access to the United States.
Obama used humanitarianism and regional security as a pretext for arming “moderate” rebels in Syria. It was viewed as imprudent, but his intention was to facilitate the rise of an Islamic caliphate that would destabilize the Middle East and threaten the United States.
Obama used economics and social justice as a pretext for comprehensive changes to America’s health-care system. It was viewed as imprudent, but his intention was to massively increase Americans’ dependency on the government.
Obama used loyalty as a pretext for trading five jihadi generals for one deserter – illegally, I might add. It was viewed as imprudent, but his intention was to provide terrorist groups with the invaluable experience these murderers could offer.
Obama uses citizenship as a pretext for failing to take decisive action against Americans fighting with ISIS in the Middle East upon their return. It is viewed as imprudent, but his intention is to enable terrorist groups within our borders.
Obama is even using the constitutional separation (of church and state) clause as a pretext for refusing to address Islamist ideology, despite his administration’s unconstitutional deportment toward Christians (in the form of the abortifacient and contraceptive mandates under Obamacare and the widespread disenfranchisement of Christians in the military).
Barack Obama used the denial of risk as a pretext for failing to restrict travel from Ebola-stricken African nations. This, too, was viewed as imprudent. Is his intention to facilitate an Ebola outbreak in the United States? Will his efforts to protect Americans from this dread disease be as ineffectual and insincere as his war against ISIS?
If the above questions paint the picture of an incomprehensibly diabolical individual, bear in mind that this individual and his contemporaries have despised everything America stands for their entire lives, and that their idols are among worst mass murderers the world has known. Then, consider their track record as indicated above.
Then, ask yourself why they wouldn’t use any and every means at their disposal to bring about the desired result.
Former NFL tight end Clint Didier, who is now a Republican candidate for Congress in Washington state, spoke last month with Mama Grizzly Radio’s Kevin Scholla, who asked him why, in his experience, “athletes and those in sports” tend to be conservative.
Didier responded that “the heart and soul of it is competition” because “as much as the left wants to take it out of America,” athletes “love to compete” which is “what America is all about.”
“And that is what about the athletes that brings them into the conservative mold because, you know, when you’re a champion, there’s no equality in being number one,” he reflected.
Later in the interview, Scholla asked Didier about the controversy over the name of the Washington, D.C., football team, for which Didier played in the 1980s. Didier insisted that “if the American people were truly offended by the Redskins name, then they wouldn’t be going to the games and they wouldn’t be buying all that memorabilia.”
He then suggested that the U.S. Patent and Trademark office’s decision to remove the team’s trademark was a politically motivated attack on the team’s owner, Dan Snyder, whose campaign contributions have gone largely to Republicans….a conspiracy theory that seems to have originated with Glenn Beck.
“One of the things people need to be looking at is who does Snyder contribute his campaign funds to, is to conservatives,” Didier said. “Is it about the name or is it about Snyder being a conservative and giving to conservative candidates? This is a question that needs to be posed in this attack on the Redskins.”
The Catholic League is displeased with Mindy Kaling, warning in a statement today — “Anal Sex Thrills ‘Mindy’” — that the “The Mindy Project” creator, along with her “homosexual writers,” may inadvertently kill people with a suggestive scene involving jokes about anal sex.
“Binge drinking, like anal sex, is potentially lethal, but Hollywood only has an interest in promoting the latter,” Catholic League president Bill Donohue writes. “That’s because of the large number of homosexual writers who work there. Catholics would appreciate it, however, if they would keep their dark secrets in the closet, where they belong.”
HT: RWW reader Andrew.
Last night’s episode of “The Mindy Project,” a Fox show, opened with an implied sex scene involving Dr. Mindy Lahiri (played by Mindy Kaling) and Danny Castellano (played by Chris Messina); it was titled, “I Slipped!” The room is dark and there is moaning.
After the title sequence, the two characters are shown in an office arguing about the sexual encounter from the night before. Mindy is upset with what Danny did. Danny insists it was a mistake. It is implied that Danny attempted anal sex.
Bill Donohue offers his thoughts on this episode:
Binge drinking, like anal sex, is potentially lethal, but Hollywood only has an interest in promoting the latter. That’s because of the large number of homosexual writers who work there. Catholics would appreciate it, however, if they would keep their dark secrets in the closet, where they belong.
In an interview yesterday with conservative talk show host Jesse Lee Peterson, former Republican congressman Allen West reiterated his unsubstantiated claim that undocumented youth are spreading a childhood respiratory disease through America, an increasingly popular talking point in the right-wing media.
West alleged that if researchers ever do find a connection between “dispersed illegal alien children” and enterovirus D68, “then shame on the president for playing politics with the health of our children, that would just be abhorrent.”
When Peterson asked West if he thought the respiratory illness “is a biological warfare,” the former congressman responded that could be a strong possibility: “You know the thing is, biological warfare doesn’t have to be something purposeful, but all of the sudden when you have contagions that are in your environment that are attacking your people, that is an aspect of biological warfare. I believe it was Tom Clancy who wrote a book about weaponizing Ebola so we need to be very aware of these things.”
In an interview yesterday with WND’s Radio America this week, anti-gay legal activist Mat Staver addressed what he sees as the apocalyptic implications of legalizing same-sex marriage, including supposed threats to the economy, government and civilization itself.
Staver fretted over the disintegration of marriage as a “unique relationship” and warned that America’s decline would be the inevitable result of our “experiment” in advancing equality for gays and lesbians
“When less people get married and you have more children out of wedlock, when you destabilize the institution of marriage, you make the economy poorer and you make the society unstable. That’s exactly what we’re having and that’s what we’re going to see here in America and around the world,” he said. “When you tinker with the very basic foundation of family and you assume that gender doesn’t matter, you ultimately affect the rest of society and the strength of civil government.”
Beyond mere social unrest, Staver warned that recent rulings in marriage cases have sent us hurtling towards self-destruction. “This is something that I believe is the beginning of the end of western civilization. You can’t simply redefine and pretend that ontological differences between men and women do not exist. This will have consequences.”
In an interview with the Sarah Palin enthusiasts at Mama Grizzly Radio last month, Louisiana Republican congressional candidate Zach Dasher — a nephew of "Duck Dynasty" patriarch Phil Robertson — repeated the view of anti-government extremists that the Second Amendment was designed to enable Americans to launch an armed insurrection against the sitting government.
“Well, you know, the Second Amendment is the one right that ensures the rest,” Dasher told host Kevin Scholla. “You take away a person’s right to defend themselves, then guess what, you can do whatever you want to them.”
“It’s important to recognize that the Second Amendment is not just the right to bear arms so we can go duck hunting or deer hunting or shoot skeet. This is a right to defend yourself, and not just against criminals but against a tyrannical government as well,” he added.
When Scholla suggested that tyranny might have arrived with the Obama administration, Dasher was less sure about the timeline, but added, “You’re right, Ronald Reagan said we’re always one generation away from tyranny. And I think it’s something that if we don’t fight for our rights, it’s a continual fight to stay free, then this will happen, you will eventually end up being taken over by a tyrant.”
Right-wing commentator Morgan Brittany, who has been busy promoting her new book “What Women Really Want” on conservative networks like Fox News and The Blaze, took to WorldNetDaily today to recount a recent dinner party conversation about whether people can trust the Obama administration to handle the spread of Ebola.
Brittany, in WND’s trademark just asking the question style of journalism, wondered if the government is “orchestrating” the Ebola outbreak to murder people and put them in FEMA coffins while imposing martial law.
“Questions were then brought up about the stockpiling of ammunition and weapons by Homeland Security over the past couple of years and the $1 billion worth of disposable FEMA coffins supposedly stored in Georgia. Why was there preparation being made for FEMA camps to house people in isolation?” she writes. “My fear is that this has all been orchestrated from the very beginning. Who knows? Maybe the current administration needs this to happen so martial law can be declared, guns can be seized and the populace can be controlled. Once that happens … game over.”
We’re happy to report to Brittany that the “$1 billion worth of disposable FEMA coffins” do not actually exist.
I sat with two men and a woman who were debating the question of whether or not Ebola was something to really be concerned about, and their comments took me aback. The men were bringing up the fact that in the past few years, everything that has come out of Washington has been misleading or an out and out lie – from Obamacare, “if you like your doctor,” to the Department of Veterans Affairs allowing vets to die waiting for an appointment. They said that they were viewing the reassurances about Ebola coming from the CDC with a skeptical eye. Their biggest question was: Why is there no urgency to stop the disease from entering the U.S.?
At that point I jumped in with some facts I had just discovered about the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Thomas Frieden, who has been the out front spokesman on the Ebola crisis. I found an article published by the Washington Post on July 16 of this year reporting that Frieden had been called to testify on Capitol Hill about researchers at his agency that had mishandled live anthrax and other deadly pathogens in a number of mishaps over the past year or so. This came on the heels of federal officials finding forgotten smallpox samples in a storage room at the National Institute for Health campus in Bethesda, Maryland. They also discovered 12 boxes and 327 vials with pathogens that included the virus behind dengue and spotted fever. When Frieden testified about the anthrax, his response was: “We missed a critical pattern, and the pattern is an insufficient culture of safety.” Really? And this is the guy in charge of making decisions on Ebola?
Upon hearing this latest evidence of the incompetence permeating our government, the conversation veered into conspiracy territory. One of the men brought up the fact that Washington has known for months if not years that we were at risk for some sort of global pandemic. According to a government supplier of emergency products, the Disaster Assistance Response Team was told to be prepared to be activated in the month of October for an outbreak of Ebola. Hmm, that’s just like the fact that they knew 60,000 illegal children were going to be coming across our southern border eight months before it happened.
Questions were then brought up about the stockpiling of ammunition and weapons by Homeland Security over the past couple of years and the $1 billion worth of disposable FEMA coffins supposedly stored in Georgia. Why was there preparation being made for FEMA camps to house people in isolation? These were the questions being seriously discussed.
My fear is that this has all been orchestrated from the very beginning. Who knows? Maybe the current administration needs this to happen so martial law can be declared, guns can be seized and the populace can be controlled. Once that happens … game over.
Liberty Counsel chairman Mat Staver delivered a blistering response to the Supreme Court’s decision this week not to take-up marriage equality appeals, telling host Jim Schneider of “Crosstalk” yesterday that the court is endangering public health by effectively legalizing same-sex marriage in several states.
Staver said same-sex marriage should remain illegal because “we know male-male sexual relationships are notoriously harmful, physically as well as mentally, and also female-female, same kinds of things.”
“It’s harmful to the individuals and those harms ultimately effect those around because they’re communicable and other kinds of serious and deadly disease,” he added.
Staver lamented that America is witnessing “a debasing of morals” as county clerks in new marriage equality states begin to issue marriage licenses, with even “people on the sidelines who don’t necessarily participate directly in the debasing acts cheering on those that do.”
“This is not something to cheer about, this is a shameful day in American history, it’s a shameful day that the Supreme Court has ultimately engulfed itself with,” Staver said.
“It’s shameful for the Supreme Court for what they have done to marriage as it has been shameful in the history of the court with regards to the Dred Scott decision or the Buck v. Bell decision, where they said that the state of Virginia can forcibly sterilize her because of this eugenics idea that they want to eliminate the undesirables of the world. That was the shameful day that we ultimately look back with shame upon and I think this is going to be one of those same kind of situations.”
This week a Kentucky-based administrative law judge upheld a 2012 human rights commission decision against a t-shirt company that cited its owner’s religious beliefs to deny service to a local gay service organization.
The ruling did not please Fox News correspondent Todd Starnes or former Southern Baptist Convention official Richard Land, who discussed the case on yesterday’s edition of “Washington Watch,” which Land was guest-hosting.
“What they just did violates the Constitution of the United States,” Land insisted. “It also shows, once again, the ugly face of the gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender movement. They are not a live-and-let-live bunch, they are, ‘We’re going to ram this down your throat, we’re going to force you to accept this or we’re going to run you out of business.’”
Starnes said the decision was proof of anti-Christian “hostility” against business owners: “Christians are coming under attack for their beliefs.”
In an interview with Steve Deace yesterday, Institute on the Constitution head and Maryland GOP politician Michael Peroutka claimed that the aim of LGBT rights advocates is to “recruit your children” into their “deathstyle.”
“Is this about sinful people want to engage in their sin, or is this about making a statement that you will go along with the sin?” Peroutka asked about the LGBT rights movement.
Deace responded by repeating his theory that LGBT people are simply seeking “validation” from the government because they can’t get it from God, adding: “We have two moral vices that have a powerful political lobby in America. One is sexually driven and the other one’s driven on covetousness, that’s the welfare state and victimology.”
Deace fretted that as part of this agenda, the gay rights movement is turning “ESPN into homosexual cake-smash make-out sessions.”
“It seems to me that the reason that it’s got to be validated, perversion has to be validated, because recruitment is necessary,” Peroutka added. “This deathstyle — I don’t call it a lifestyle — this deathstyle does not reproduce, it needs to recruit, so it’s got to recruit your children.”
Earlier in the interview, Deace said that governors should just ignore court rulings that they disagree with — such as marriage equality and legalized abortion —saying that if he were governor he would have shut down every abortion clinic in the state “and arrested every employee for killing, every single one of them.”
“The Nazis, everything they did was technically legal too,” he said.
As federal courts legalized same-sex marriage in several new states this week, Matt Barber unsurprisingly railed against the trend in an appearance on “The Janet Mefferd Show” yesterday. Barber insisted that judges shouldn’t be making decisions regarding state marriage laws, before adding that even state legislatures don’t “have the right” to pass marriage equality laws.
“This doesn’t even belong in the courts,” he told Mefferd. “Marriage is what marriage is, you can no more redefine marriage than you can suspend the laws of gravity. They can say they’re going to do it but it doesn’t alter reality, so the fact is this matter doesn’t belong in the courts. States don’t even have the right to redefine marriage, it’s like saying I want to redefine purple.”
“Gay marriage and religious freedom cannot coexist in harmony,” Barber predicted. “We are going to see more and more anti-Christian persecution and discrimination at levels we could not have imagined. People are starting to see that this is really about attacking Christians and Christianity more so than it’s about this euphemistic ‘marriage equality’ nonsense that they’re throwing out there.”
While Barber doesn’t believe that state legislatures can pass marriage equality laws, he does think governors should simply refuse to follow court rulings they disagree with and resist “San Francisco-style social experimentation.”
I’d love to see a Gov. Rick Perry or a Gov. Mary Fallin say to these federal courts of appeals: ‘Excuse me, get the heck out of Oklahoma, get out of Texas. We the people have voted, this is our state constitution, Baker v. Nelson is clear, the Supreme Court has already spoken on this issue, there is no constitutional right. Thank you for your opinion, but that’s all it is, it is an opinion, and we are going to go ahead and reject that opinion and we are going to go ahead and maintain our constitution and the natural, age-old, millennia-old definition of marriage as between man and woman, we are not going to get into this San Francisco-style social experimentation in Oklahoma and Texas, thank you very much.’ I would love to see somebody with the courage to do that.
Conservative talk show host Steve Deace was, to say the least, livid at the news this week that the Supreme Court declined to hear appeals of a number of lower-court marriage equality rulings, thus allowing same-sex couples in several new states to begin marrying.
Deace spent a good part of his interview Monday with Religious Right activist Bob Vander Plaats railing against the LGBT rights movement, which he declared is “not about ‘I want to visit people I love in a hospital’ or ‘I want to pass on to people I care about an inheritance’” but is instead about a search for “validation and ‘I want someone to validate my desires that my conscience tells me are wrong, that my conscience tells me go against the way I was made.’”
“‘To validate these desires and impulses that I don’t think I can control, and I want you to tell me that I’m okay just the way I am,’” he continued, in the voice of an imaginary gay-rights activist. “‘And if the God who made me, who I ultimately desire validation from…if that God will not validate me, then I will go to the next most powerful force on earth and try to get them to do it, and that is government.’”
He added that “the onslaught of pro-sodomy propaganda in our culture” is yet another step in this search for validation: “You will be made to care when your kids watch the Disney Channel. You will be made to care when you watch ESPN. There is nowhere for you to go. Consider the onslaught of pro-sodomy propaganda our culture has been deluged with and the numbers in that Pew research poll. There’s a backlash.” (He was referring to a recent Pew poll showing a downtick in support for marriage equality.)
Vander Plaats agreed with Deace’s assessment: “This isn’t about Mary and Susy having a garden next door anymore. This is about saturating every piece of life with this very issue for what you talk about, and I think you’re right, Steve: validation.”
In an interview with Iowa-based conservative talk show host Steve Deace on Monday, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee repeated his recommendation that governors simply ignore the Supreme Court’s decision to let stand lower court rulings legalizing marriage equality in several new states, adding that state governments should have also ignored Roe v. Wade and the Supreme Court rulings banning school-sponsored prayer.
When Deace pressed him on the “maelstrom” that would be set off if state governments simply ignored court rulings on marriage, Huckabee responded that it was in fact the courts that have set off a “constitutional crisis” by ruling in favor of marriage equality.
“I look back to 1973,” he said, referring to the year in which Roe v. Wade was decided, “and I’m wondering what would have happened if the two branches of government, the executive and the legislative, simply said, ‘We appreciate your opinion, court, but now if states wish to empower that, I guess they can do so, but until that happens we’re not automatically going to go killing 55 million babies over the next 40 years.’”
In cases such as Roe and rulings in favor of marriage equality and church-state separation, Huckabee said, elected officials should have said, “Well, the courts have spoken and it’s an important voice, but it’s not the voice of God and the Supreme Court isn’t God” and simply ignored the courts’ rulings.
Earlier in the interview, Deace insisted that a drop in support for LGBT rights reported in a recent Pew poll happened because “people are seeing this really isn’t about consensual love…this is really about in the end using the coercive force of government to get you to abandon your own moral conscience.”
Huckabee agreed, adding, “It’s never been an honest situation where those who were advocating the most extreme levels of changing our culture were sincere and straightforward and I don’t think we’ve seen the last of it.”
He added his hope that in reaction to yesterday’s Supreme Court decision, “somewhere there will be a governor who will simply say, ‘No, I’m not going to enforce that’” and order county clerks not to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
Tomorrow, people in much of the world will have the opportunity to witness a rare “total lunar eclipse,” which could turn the moon a deep shade of red. But, be warned: such a “blood moon” isn’t just an astronomical curiosity. According to a story that WorldNetDaily has been pushing for months, it’s also potentially a message from God warning of the impending Last Days.
In an interview with WorldNetDaily published yesterday, Pastor Mark Biltz — who literally wrote the book on the “heavenly signs” disguised in blood moons — reports that tomorrow’s eclipse could potentially signal “that God is closing this chapter of human history” and warning us of the coming “Great Tribulation mentioned in the Bible.”
“All these signs, coming together at one time, are potentially the culminating signals that God is closing this chapter of human history,” Biltz said. “This could be the final curtain call before the Great Tribulation mentioned in the Bible. God has always wanted to warn His people, and the rest of the world, before He intervenes. What better way to communicate to us than through the universal language of heavenly signs that speak to every tribe, tongue, and nation?”
He said, “In the Old Testament, the prophet Joel states: ‘The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come’ (Joel 2:31). In the New Testament, Jesus is quoted as saying: ‘Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light … And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory’ (Matthew 24:29-30).”
In an email promoting the article, WND backs up Biltz’s point by noting that since the last blood moon occurred, several terrible things have happened in the world, including the spread of the Ebola virus and the rise of ISIS.
If Wednesday morning's total lunar eclipse – the second so-called blood moon – is indeed a "culminating signal that God is closing this chapter of human history," then consider history's path since the last blood moon occurred in April:
The death toll from the newly identified Ebola virus had not yet reached 150, all in Liberia and Guinea ... far from the United States.
Early reports of crucifixions and other atrocities in Syria did not yet have the labels ISIL, ISIS or IS in most people's minds.
Something big is happening in the world and in time ...
Not only has John Hagee promoted the blood moons theory and WND editor Joseph Farah endorsed it as “overwhelmingly persuasive,” it may soon have an adherent in the United States Congress: Georgia Republican Jody Hice, who on his radio program earlier this year urged listeners to “look at this very, very seriously”:
Yesterday, Religious Right talk show host Janet Mefferd condemned the “lawlessness” of the U.S. judicial system following recent court decisions that have advanced marriage equality for same-sex couples.
She warned that judges are threatening the system of self-government with their decisions to strike down marriage bans. “The bigger question is: how have we lost our right to govern ourselves?” she asked. “That’s what we’re losing.”
“They get away with it. You just push the lawless limit and see how much you can get away with, and unfortunately, people are getting away with an awful lot,” she said. “I don’t understand why there aren’t more Christians yelling and screaming — nicely, of course — on this issue of lawlessness. Do we not care about lawlessness? How do you have a republic without law, the rule of law and the respect for law? How does a republic survive when it loses respect for the law?”
The American Family Association’s Sandy Rios dedicated much of her radio show today to attacking the Supreme Court for refusing to hear appeals on several marriage equality cases, which led her to discuss the purported threats to religious freedom that marriage equality is bringing to America.
Rios warned that religious liberty is in peril and viewers should purchase a new AFA DVD, “A Time To Speak.”
“If we don’t do something, I think we’re going to see — and this is radical — I think we’re going to see riots in the street, we’re going to see starvation, we’re going to see things we have never seen before, we’re going to see a complete breakdown in terms of law enforcement, it’s going to be a nightmare,” she said. “This will be what you are handing to your children if you don’t speak up now. I’m not sure we can pull it back, but are you going to say in retrospect that you did nothing?”
Later in the show, Rios spoke to Kelly Shackelford of the Liberty Institute about the supposed death of religious freedom in America, linking it with the news out of the Supreme Court.
Rios said “leaders the [gay rights] movement” are “fascists when it comes to this issue” who “will not stop until people who object are brought to their knees,” an assessment that Shackelford agreed with, and in turn denounced gay rights advocates for using “unconscionable” tactics and pushing “the ultimate intolerance.”
Pat Robertson today rebuked the Supreme Court for “punting” on marriage equality, blasting the courts — along with Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring — for “overriding the wishes of the states” to “protect traditional marriage.”
The “700 Club” host later compared the decision to Roe v. Wade: “It’s the same thing with abortion. Instead of letting the people decide as they should’ve under the Constitution, it was taken out of their hands by the Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade and because of that no effort by the people has been successful ever since and it’s been a travesty as we’ve seen over 50 million unborn babies slaughtered in this land.”
The Family Research Council’s Travis Weber slammed the Fourth, Seventh, and Tenth Circuit Courts yesterday for their decisions knocking down state bans on same-sex marriage, telling “Washington Watch” guest host Richard Land that the rulings were based on “poorly constructed, very poor analysis.”
“Even thinking back to how we were trained in law school to approach legal questions, if you used some of the analysis that these judges have used in striking down state marriage laws, you would be scolded in a lot of legal writing classes,” he said.