Before Kim Davis, there was Roy Moore, the chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court who invoked divine law in his effort to block his state from enforcing a pre-Obergefell federal court decision striking down its ban on same-sex marriage.
Moore was the keynote speaker at Eagle Council 2015, a St. Louis conference hosted by Phyllis Schlafly’s group Eagle Forum last week, where he naturally brought up Davis’ similar fight in Kentucky against marriage equality. The Alabama justice dedicated his entire speech to attacking the Obergefell decision and, like Davis’lawyers, compared the clerk to victims of the Holocaust.
After reading Martin Niemöller’s poem “First They Came For The Socialists…,” Moore decided to write his own version in honor of Davis: “Ladies in gentlemen, we can say the same thing today. They came for the bakers, I didn’t bake cakes. They came for the florists, but I didn’t deal with flowers. They came for the little clerk down in Kentucky by the name of Kim Davis, but I’m not a clerk, I have nothing do with issuing licenses. Then they came for me, and nobody was left.”
“This will touch every person in this room, every child in this room eventually,” he said of Obergefell. “This opinion is not like other opinions that have been issued.”
Rowan County, Kentucky, clerk Kim Davis’ attempt to block her office from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples has inspired Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly, who writes in a column today that Rowan County should become “a ‘sanctuary county’ where the biblical view of marriage continues to be honored and respected.”
However, Schlafly writes in WorldNetDaily, judicial tyrants are instead sending Davis to jail “merely for abiding by state law and the Bible.”
When the Supreme Court ruled by the narrowest possible margin that Kentucky’s definition of marriage is unconstitutional, the Court’s decision was qualified by its assurance that religious freedom would not be jeopardized. “The First Amendment ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection,” the Court solemnly intoned on June 26.
In the Appalachian hills of eastern Kentucky, one brave woman is testing whether Justice Anthony Kennedy really meant it when he wrote those words. But the local federal judge for eastern Kentucky, David Bunning, wrongly sent Kim Davis to jail for her beliefs, without respecting or accommodating her sincere Christian beliefs.
It is not “rule of law” to jail someone based on judge-made law; it is “rule by judges.” Kim Davis is not committing civil disobedience, because she has not violated any law. She was arrested, humiliated with a mug shot and jailed, merely for abiding by state law and the Bible.
When the Supreme Court ruled that all 50 states must license same-sex unions on the same terms as marriage, the court was implicitly declaring that Christianity and the Bible are wrong. If San Francisco can be a sanctuary city, let’s allow Rowan County, Kentucky, to be a “sanctuary county” where the biblical view of marriage continues to be honored and respected.
Linda Harvey of Mission America agrees, calling in her own WorldNetDaily column for such sanctuary cities to not only ban same-sex marriage but also prohibit gay pride parades and sexual reassignment surgery. Because “family life would be much healthier and safer in these cities,” Harvey thinks “the trend would be contagious as people share their positive experiences with friends and relatives across the country”:
Since we are beginning to see violations of constitutional rights based on objections to homosexuality as marriage, I believe there’s a clear precedent for establishing sanctuary cities for authentic, lawful, man/woman marriage.
Think about how great life would be in those cities. After all, unlike the defiance of immigration law, these cities would be upholding the actual law under our actual Constitution, not the imaginary one in the mind of Justice Anthony Kennedy.
So, why not cities that uphold a standing, just law? Family life would be much healthier and safer in these cities. Keep out the vile “gay-pride” parades as well as harassment lawsuits against bakers and florists. And how about no pro-homosexual lessons in school, falsely implying that some people are born homosexual, or born to mutilate themselves by sex-change surgery? Also, no ban on counseling for teens who have same-sex attractions.
Of course, such cities would not be without challenges. They would be targets for dirty tricks, phony “hate crimes,” special sections on “gay apartheid” by the New York Times and so on. The formulaic fables and drama, based on no facts but lots of screeching, can be composed now in advance.
We are not unaware of the schemes of Satan, nor of Saul Alinsky adherents.
It will take a courageous city council to take this step, yet the trend would be contagious as people share their positive experiences with friends and relatives across the country.
In a speech to a group of young conservatives last week, Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, called for the impeachment of Supreme Court Justices Elena Kagan and Ruth Bader Ginsburg in retribution for their ruling in favor of marriage equality, and insisted that a study trapping gay couples on an island would prove that gays and lesbians can’t have “what nature says is the preferred marriage.”
Gohmert, speaking at the Washington, D.C., conference of the college chapter of Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum, said that Justices Ginsburg and Kagan “ought to be impeached” for participating in the marriage equality case after officiating the legal weddings of same-sex couples.
“I think they ought to be impeached, I think ought to be removed, and until Congress shows that we do have some say in the Constitution over the courts the abuses are just going to get worse,” Gohmert lamented. He warned audience members that the Supreme Court wants you to “forget what Moses said God said, forget what Jesus said God said, we’re God and you go by what we say.”
He then suggested a study to prove that same-sex couples can’t have “the preferred marriage”:
We could take four heterosexual couples, married, and put them on an island where they have everything they need to sustain life. Then take four all-male couples and put them on an island with all they need to sustain life, take four couples of women, married, and put them on an island, and let’s come back in 100 to 200 years and see which one nature says is the preferred marriage.
Gohmert also told the audience that there’s “a case to be made” for impeaching President Obama, although he admitted he “hadn’t really thought about it” until reading a book by extreme conservative author Andrew McCarthy.
In an interview with far-right pastor and Colorado state Rep. Gordon Klingenschmit today, Phyllis Schlafly declared that the Supreme Court’s recent marriage equality ruling should simply be ignored while "we the people" decide if we want to overturn it.
"There's nothing in the Constitution about homosexual marriage," Schlafly said. "The judges made it up and some people think that because they did and the Supreme Court has spoken, therefore we have to accept it. We don't."
Likening the ruling to the Dred Scott decision, Schlafly said that "we don't have to obey it just because a few judges said so," before declaring that GOP presidential hopefuls must declare that they will flout the decision, something several candidateshavealreadydone.
"We just don't believe in accepting what some judge says is the new law," she said. "The Constitution starts with 'we the people,' and so what we need to do is say just because the Supreme Court has handed down a decision, we'll re-evaluate it and we'll decide whether we want to overturn it or not."
Martin compared marriage equality opponents to David fighting Goliath, who “taunted Israel like the Supreme Court taunted us with this ruling.”
Saying that merely electing a new president or pressuring Congress won’t be enough to respond to the marriage equality ruling, he said, “David didn’t fight Goliath in the way that Goliath wanted. He fought in a different set of terms. And I will tell you, one thing that has not been invoked in a meaningful way is the doctrine of, is how to limit the judiciary with impeachment.”
“I think we’re to that point” of impeachment, he said, explaining that while the four more liberal justices are “corrupt in terms of their worldview,” Kennedy “has really put himself up as the king of America in a way that the founders would have recognized as a discussion point for an impeachable offense.”
Martin responded that he couldn’t speak for churches, but that if the GOP tries to “water down marriage,” that will be “the end of the Republican Party.”
Martin then, bizarrely, compared the emergence of the Republican Party in the 1860s to fight back efforts to extend slavery to the current Republican Party’s “retreat” on the issue of the Confederate flag.
“People have been trying to do that, what they did for years, and our people retreated and surrendered within like two days,” he said of the flag issue. “I’ve never seen the speed with which the culture put our people into rapid retreat. They didn’t even make meaningful arguments about the loss of life and the brother against brother and what the Confederacy meant. They just retreated to the space they were pointed to.”
“It’s an extraordinary moment, but the tide can shift, as you say, if we get back to first principles,” he added.
Phyllis Schlafly’s latest newsletter is promoting the Eagle Forum’s 44th annual leadership council gathering. The ever-direct Schlafly gets right to the point:
Why is this Eagle Council so important? It is absolutely urgent that we elect a conservative President. Eagle Council is both a strategic forum featuring top-notch experts helpful to activists like you AND a celebration of our values and achievements to encourage all Eagles.
What exactly are the values Schlafly’s gathering will be celebrating? If her main speakers are any indication, those values would be anti-immigrant and anti-gay bigotry, along with lawless resistance to court rulings on LGBT equality and church-state separation.
Can you guess? Friday night’s keynote will be given by Ann Coulter, who has been complaining that the media has gotten so tired of her predictable liberal-bashing shtick that they aren’t giving enough attention to her latest bottom-feeding screed, “Adios America! The Left’s Plan to Turn Our Country Into a Third World Hellhole.”
On Saturday evening, Schalfly’s Eagles will hear from Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, who was removed from the bench once for refusing to obey federal court orders to remove a Ten Commandments monument he installed in the courthouse. More recently, a group that he founded and that his wife leads, the Foundation for Moral Law, vowed to defy the “illegitimate” marriage equality ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court.
On Sunday, Moore told a congregation, “Welcome to the new world. It’s just changed for you Christians. You are going to be persecuted, according to the U.S. Supreme Court dissents.” Moore has previously claimed same-sex marriage would destroy America and invite God’s wrath on the country.
Schlafly’s event will be in St. Louis September 11-13. Mark your calendars!
Phyllis Schlafly is none too pleased with the Supreme Court’s decision striking down state gay marriage bans, and has a modest proposal for Congress: Pass a resolution affirming the “dignity of opposite-sex married couples,” especially that of couples where “a provider-husband is the principal breadwinner and his wife is dedicated to the job of homemaker.”
While this resolution might not change much in the short term, the anti-feminist crusader writes in her syndicated column today, it might act as an inspiration to the anti-gay movement as they continue to fight marriage equality.
Justice Kennedy's opinion for a 5-4 majority of the Supreme Court has rightly been condemned for its lack of grounding in the constitutional text he is sworn to uphold. Unable to find gay marriage in either the due process clause or the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, Kennedy ultimately rests his case on what Justice Clarence Thomas sarcastically called the "dignity clause" of the Constitution.
There is no such clause, of course, although Kennedy's majority opinion mentioned "dignity" nine times. But if dignity can be conferred by decisions of the Supreme Court, then Congress can do so, too.
Therein lies a first response: Congress should formally recognize the dignity of opposite-sex married couples and resolve to protect that dignity in our laws. A joint resolution should recite the many reasons why the special union of husband and wife has been honored for "millennia," as Kennedy admitted.
A crash program to rebuild the traditional American nuclear family is urgently necessary for continuing our nation's political and economic success in this century. This won't happen if we transform marriage into a means of giving "dignity" to mostly childless homosexuals.
Once Congress is on a roll to confer dignity, it should confer an extra measure of dignity on the single-earner family, where a provider-husband is the principal breadwinner and his wife is dedicated to the job of homemaker, a role more socially beneficial than working in the paid labor force.
After reciting the foregoing reasons and many others, Congress should conclude its resolution by formally resolving that the traditional family, founded on a married husband and wife, carries special dignity and deserves special recognition because it provides unique benefits to society.
This is not to deny that every human person has value and dignity, or that other domestic relationships may have some value in limited circumstances. But Congress should respond to Kennedy with a ringing affirmation of the unique dignity that should be accorded to society's foundational unit: the marriage of husband and wife.
Naysayers will scoff that the foregoing resolution doesn't change the Supreme Court decision, and you can imagine a late-night comedian comparing it to the medal of courage the Wizard of Oz presented to the Cowardly Lion. But movie fans will recall how that gesture inspired Dorothy and her companions toward achieving their goal.
This past Saturday, Phyllis Schlafly hosted former House GOP Majority Leader Tom DeLay on “Eagle Forum Live” to discuss the alleged threat of gay marriage. Schlafly segued into the topic of gay marriage by describing an open letter to the SupremeCourt, signed by conservative pastors and politicians, pledging to defy any Court decision which strikes down state bans on same-sex marriage.
DeLay lamented that “people don’t understand the constitution. We haven’t taught our children now for three or four generations what the Constitution is, and the separation of powers, and what our Founding Fathers had in mind as this brilliant understanding of how you can limit government and limit the tyranny put on us through people or oligarchies.”
Because of this supposed constitutional ignorance, DeLay claimed, “right now, the American people don’t understand that the Supreme Court, when it makes a ruling, it’s just an opinion if no one enforces that ruling. The Supreme Court doesn’t have a police force; the Supreme Court doesn’t have an army; the Supreme Court doesn’t have people that can enforce their ruling.” Therefore, if conservatives “stand up to them and invoke the Constitution, then we don’t have to accept a ruling on marriage that redefines marriage. And that’s basically what this ad is all about. We’re sending a message to the Supreme Court that, number one, it’s illegal that they have this case before them; it’s not in their jurisdiction.”
Proving his Constitutional prowess, DeLay argued that “it’s not in their authority to write law by ten unelected, unaccountable people, lawyers, and if – this is a red line that we’re drawing. If they rule against marriage, we will all defy them.”
Further along in the show, a caller, responding to the overreach of the Supreme Court, noted that “civil rights laws, such as Brown v. Board of Education and Virginia v. Loving [sic], were put on us by courts legislating from the bench and presidential executive orders. And back then even one-third of the black people did not want integration. And Governor George Wallace warned about the tyranny now happening under the Obama administration.”
Responding to this lecture, Schlafly observed, “Well, lots of mistakes have been made along those lines.”
DeLay concluded his time on Schlafly’s show by commentating on the “danger” of the potential imposition of martial law by pointing to the stand-off at Bundy Ranch in April 2015, where Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy refused to pay grazing fees for using federal land. “He stood up to them and backed them down,” DeLay said.
Sen. Mike Lee of Utah joined Phyllis Schlafly on her “Eagle Forum Live” radio program last month, where he took a call from a listener who asked if he agreed “that the original Constitution didn’t give the Supreme Court the power to rule anything about marriage” and that even Justice John Marshall, who established the principle of judicial review, “never said that the court could change the definition of marriage.”
“Where did the Supreme Court get the power to change the definition of marriage?” the caller asked. “And all the justices, all nine of them, even though they disagree, they all seem to think that they have the power to make that decision.”
“They don’t have that power, the Constitution didn’t give it to them,” Lee responded.
“There are a few who appear to take the position that something in the Constitution, something in the 14th Amendment in particular, gives them this power,” he said. “I strongly, strongly disagree with that viewpoint. I don’t think it does, and I think they are mistaken in that conclusion. And it think it’s wrong, I think it’s disruptive of the constitutional order for them to take a debatable matter and take it beyond debate, to take a state matter and take it to the federal government, not just to Congress, but to the Supreme Court, to a group of nine lawyers dressed in black robes who are not elected, but who are appointed for life. And I think that’s a big problem.”
“I fear that what could happen is that the government could start discriminating against religious individuals and religious institutions that have a religious belief about the definition of marriage,” he said. “I don’t want that to happen. I hesitate to imagine what an America that would have that as part of its legal system would look like.”
RWW’s Paranoia-Rama takes a look at five of the week’s most absurd conspiracy theories from the Right.
This week, we learn that President Obama and Hillary Clinton are in cahoots with radical Islam, Caitlyn Jenner’s gender transition is a hoax, Ferguson has unleashed a wave of criminals, and gays continue to destroy the nation.
Obama’s Muslim Plot
Conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly explained in an interview with WorldNetDaily this week that President Obama is planning for the U.S. to take in Muslim refugees from war-torn nations such a Syria as part of his plan to wage “war on America,” knowing full well that Syrian refugees seek to “take over the world and establish their caliphate.”
“I don’t think he should let any Muslims in this country,” Schlafly said. “There is no reason why they should come in.” By permitting Muslim refugees to enter the U.S., Schlafly argued, “Obama is trying to absolutely change America by bringing in people who have no sympathy with what Americans believe.”
On her Eagle Forum blog, Schlafly also praised Ann Coulter’s new anti-immigrant screed “Adios America,” thanking Coulter for “alerting Americas to how Obama and the Democrats are destroying the land we love” by “diluting our population” with individuals “who commit all sorts of unspeakable crimes, in particular crimes against very young women and girls.”
Michael Savage joined in on the conspiracy theory, calling Obama a “con man shyster” who is attempting to destroy America by “injecting, like a virus, Muslims from Syria into all-white communities in America.” Obama, according to Savage, has also taken “infected children from Honduras and put them in every school district he could.”
Plenty of right-wing activists are upset about Caitlyn Jenner’s transition. But some have looked beyond the headlines to reveal the true conspiracy that’s afoot.
Alex Jones, host of “InfoWars”, hypothesized that Jenner’s announcement was actually just a plot to distract Americans from Obama’s mischievous, scheming ways. Jones declared that he does not “like being force-fed constantly this weird, one agenda. The obsession, it’s got to be from like five, six years, because I cover media, with the trannies and transvestites.”
“What’s behind the agenda?” Jones asked, revealing that the true agenda of the media is to not only distract us from Obama’s civil war but to “make the coolest thing to be” a “tranny or a transvestite” and glorify a “creepy old guy.”
Jones is not alone in his suspicions, as Cliff Kincaid of the conservative group Accuracy In Media wondered in Barbwire if Jenner’s transition was just “a hoax” to promote her upcoming TV show. Kincaid argued that the greatest threat is to children, criticizing Jenner’s supporters for sending an “extremely damaging” message. Kincaid made sure to warn us that “the nation may not survive, as it becomes a laughingstock before self-destructing or becoming easy pickings for a determined foreign adversary.”
While it may seem like Jenner is simply showing the world her authentic self, Kincaid urged us to question, “Where is the evidence that this is anything but a hoax?”
Hillary Clinton And Her Radical Muslim Cronies
The right loves to hate Hillary Clinton, and the latest conspiracy theories paint Clinton as a supporter and friend of “murderous Islamic thugs.” Rick Wiles, host of “Trunews,” spoke to Christopher Farrell of Judicial Watch Tuesday about his group’s claim that the U.S. compound in Benghazi was “arming Al Qaeda” and coordinating arms shipments to Islamic terrorists in Syria. While this connection may force some to then question why Islamic terrorists attacked the Benghazi compound in 2012, this question did not concern Wiles and Farrell.
Wiles compared the end of Gary Hart’s presidential campaign due to a photograph surfacing “of him with a pretty blonde sitting on his lap” to the apparent “murderous Islamic thugs sitting on the lap of Hillary Clinton.”
While a Republican-led investigation by the House Select Committee on Intelligence found Judicial Watch’s allegations about arm ships to Syria to be as credible as Hillary playing Santa with Islamic terrorists, Farrell and Wiles are not the only ones to remain unconvinced. David Horowitz, a far-right conservative activist, alleged in an interview with Newsmax TV on Tuesday that Hillary Clinton’s aide, Huma Abedin, leaked information to the militants who killed four American diplomats in Benghazi. Clinton “got four people killed in Benghazi,” Horowitz argued. “She, you know, disclosed her private emails to Huma Abedin, a Muslim Brotherhood operative that showed where Ambassador Stephens was all the time, making him a perfect target.”
‘The Ferguson Effect”
Manhattan Institute fellow Heather Mac Donald penned an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal last Friday titled “The New Nationwide Crime Wave” and the effect has been a week of media outlets sounding the alarm. Apparently, the civil unrest that began after the killing of Michael Brown has flooded the country, inspiring widespread crime.
What this theory lacks in nuance it makes up for in cherry-picked statistics that create a misleading image of increased violence and death. Switching between comparing shootings, violent felonies, and gun-related homicides, Mac Donald argued that the U.S. is “in the grips of a hysteria against cops” and that “cops have gotten the message that they should back off policing,” causing the flood gates to open and crime to wash over the nation.
This tsunami of crime, claimed Mac Donald, is the fault of the “mainstream media, the university presidents talking about assaults on blacks and of course the president and former attorney general.”
Anti-Gay Conspiracy Of The Week
This week in anti-gay conspiracies, gay men are exporting sodomy “to the entire universe” and the prospect of gay marriage will destroy America and cause millions to flee and/or demand secession.
Mike Heath, former head of the Maine Family Policy Council and current blogger on BarbWire, warned that the “[gay] virus is spreading rapidly. It won’t be enough to pervert the whole world with this evil anti-family worldview. Since the developed governments of the world aspire to colonizing planets we have to prepare for the export of sodomy to other worlds—to the entire universe!” Referencing the Apostle Paul, Heath pointed out that “you can tell when a nation has become a walking corpse when it has endorsed perverted sex.”
Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, in an interview with CNS News, had a similarly dire warning, claiming that a Supreme Court ruling in favor of marriage equality would “literally cause the destruction of our country.” The court is “toying with something that’s like dynamite and will destroy our country,” he said.
If, however, by some stroke of luck America does not blow up following a ruling in favor of marriage equality, WorldNetDaily founder and editor Joseph Farah promises that it would be met by secession and mass emigration. Farah wrote that “we need a Promised Land. We need and Exodus strategy.” He asked if there are “any governors or legislatures out there among the 50 states willing to secede to offer a refuge for the God-fearing?” If governors cannot promise Farah this, he promised us there would be a “pilgrimage by millions of Americans” fleeing marriage equality.
CNS News posted an audio clip of part of the interview:
CNS News posted an audio clip of part of the interview: - See more at: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/roy-moore-gay-marriage-will-literally-cause-destruction-our-country#sthash.SG52o5UE.dpuf
Unsurprisingly, Eagle Forum’s Phyllis Schlafly is a big fan of Ann Coulter’s new anti-immigrant screed “Adios America!”
In a rave review today, Schlafly hails Coulter for exposing how immigration is “diluting our population with people who don’t love America, don’t respect our Constitution and laws, don’t even speak our language, and commit all sorts of unspeakable crimes.”
She then goes into quite a bit of detail about these crimes, “in particular, crimes against very young women and girls.”
“Americans want our border closed to this flow of anti-American foreigners and criminals,” Schlafly concludes. “Thank you, Ann Coulter for alerting Americans to how Obama and the Democrats are destroying the land we love.”
Ann Coulter lives up to her reputation of issuing warnings and political comment that nobody else dares to say in her newest book, Adios, America! It’s aptly titled; she makes the case that it is Goodbye to the America we know and love if we don’t stop diluting our population with people who don’t love America, don’t respect our Constitution and laws, don’t even speak our language, and commit all sorts of unspeakable crimes.
Adios, America! brims with the scathing humor that has propelled Ann’s previous ten books into bestsellers.
Ann Coulter gives hundreds of specific examples of major crimes committed by illegal immigrants and, in particular, crimes against very young women and girls. She shows the devious ways that the media conceal the fact that these horrendous crimes are committed by illegals whom our government should never have let into our country.
The media cover-up doesn’t conceal merely the nationality of these criminals or the frequency of their crimes. The media cover-up also conceals the depravity of these crimes that are so horrific I can’t bring myself to describe them in this column.
Adios, America! spells out chapter and verse on the attitudes and customs of foreigners whom Obama is welcoming by the millions into America, including their horrific mistreatment of very young women and even some younger than teens. Where are the feminists when we need them to shout about the “war on women”?
A new Gallup poll reports that Americans are becoming more liberal on social issues. In fact, Americans are becoming more conservative on many social issues such as pro-life, so our candidates don’t have to take any more advice from those highly paid strategists who tell them to avoid mention of social issues.
Americans want our border closed to this flow of anti-American foreigners and criminals. Thank you, Ann Coulter for alerting Americans to how Obama and the Democrats are destroying the land we love.
In an interview with WorldNetDaily this weekend, conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly declared that the U.S.’s plans to take in refugees from Muslim countries, such as some who are fleeing Syria’s civil war, is in fact part of President Obama’s “war on America” and an attempt to help Muslims “take over the world and establish their caliphate.”
“I don’t think he should let any Muslims in this country,” Schlafly said. “There’s no reason why they should come in.”
President Obama is instigating a war on the United States, according to longtime conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly. But the president hasn’t dropped a bomb or fired a shot; rather, he has opened the country to tens of millions of immigrants and refugees from all over the world, including from Muslim countries that hate America.
“It is waging war on America,” Schlafly told WND. “Muslims would like to take over the world and establish their caliphate, and Obama has let so many Muslims in. I don’t think he should let any Muslims in this country. There’s no reason why they should come in.”
“Obama is trying to absolutely change America by bringing in people who have no sympathy with what Americans believe,” she declared. “They have no concept of limited government, of constitutional government, of rule of law, et cetera. There’s no reason we should let in people who don’t even like America.”
Schlafly, as always, is chiefly concerned with how immigrants will fit into the American social fabric.
“Anybody who comes in should have to renounce allegiance to his former country and accept the American way of life,” she declared. “And if he doesn’t want to do that, goodbye! Adios!”
In a radio commentary earlier this month, Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly acknowledged that it’s “quite true that America was built by hard-working people from all over the world,” but cautioned that today’s immigrants from Latin America are “not the same sort” as the wave of mostly European immigrants who came to the U.S. in the early 20th century.
Schlafly criticized President Obama for calling the U.S. “a nation of immigrants,” saying, “The problem is that the immigrants coming into our country today are not the same sort as the immigrants who contributed so much to building our great country. The immigrants who came to America in the 1920s and ‘30s were different – with very different motives.”
“It’s quite true that America was built by hard working people from all over the world who sought a place of freedom where they could realize their dream,” she said. “But today’s immigrants don’t have the same motivation, the same love for America, the same desire to be part of the American culture and dream.”
She cited Russian-born songwriter Irving Berlin as the kind of America-loving immigrant who supposedly no longer come to the United States.
Schlafly's commentary varies slightly from a transcript provided on Eagle Forum's website, which adds this thought: "[Today's immigrants] don’t want to leave their homes and become Americans, accepting all that comes along with it. Many of them just want to reap the rewards of our free nation without accepting American culture, the English language, and the rule of law.”
One overlooked murderer of the family, Schlafly said, are “the free trade people who have done the work of the feminists by getting rid of [middle class] jobs.” This led her to discuss the gender pay gap, which she said is actually something that women like because they want to marry someone who makes more than they do (a sentiment that she has expressed before).
“Women like to marry a man who makes more than she does,” she explained, “so then she can take time off and work fewer hours when she has something she’d rather do like have a kid and look after her children. So the pay gap, really, is something that women like.”
In an interview with conservative radio host Chuck Wilder on Monday, Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly said that lawsuits against business owners who violate nondiscrimination measures by refusing service to gay and lesbian customers show that marriage equality advocates ultimately seek “to wipe out the Christian religion.”
“Have you noticed that only Christian small-businesspeople have been harassed and sued for refusing to participate in same-sex marriages even though our fast-growing immigrant populations, you know of Muslims, Hindus and other faiths are also opposed to that concept?” Wilder asked. “The use of same-sex marriage to attack Christian businesses but not businesses run by members of other religions demonstrates what is really driving the demand for the new constitutional right to same-sex marriage.”
“Well, that is right,” Schlafly responded. “They want to wipe out the Christian religion. And most of these other religions do not recognize same-sex marriage. I assume there are some Muslim bakers and photographers and other people who have been harassed, but they’re not being attacked and they’re not being criticized.”
The Center for Immigration Studies, a group that wants to cut back on legal immigration, released a report this month on the growing percentage of the country’s population that’s made up by immigrants, which has greatly alarmed the far-right news outlet WorldNetDaily.
For comment on the news, WND turned to Phyllis Schlafly, who told them that it was all part of a “deliberate” plan by President Obama for “letting in all these people in who don’t want to be Americans, who don’t want to speak English” in order to bring about the “death to the conservative movement and the Republican Party.”
Only eight short years from now, immigrants will make up a record-high 14.8 percent of the total U.S. population, and longtime conservative leader Phyllis Schlafly views the rising tide of newcomers as a purposeful attack on the country.
By the nation’s own president.
“It’s deliberate,” Schlafly told WND in an interview. “It’s not any accident. It’s because Obama and his friends are letting all these people in who don’t want to be Americans, who don’t want to speak English.”
“I think one of the reasons Obama and his friends are so eager to open the gates to more and more immigrants is they think it’s going to defeat the conservative movement and the Republican Party,” Schlafly said. “Of course, they all come from countries that are not used to the idea of limited government. They’re used to countries where the government makes all the decisions, and they don’t know anything different.
“They don’t understand what Americans mean when we talk about limited government, so I think one of their motives clearly is death to the conservative movement and the Republican Party.”
Schlafly, however, was more optimistic than conservative strategist Richard Viguerie, who told WND that immigration could be on the verge of destroying America:
“It’s going to pull America to the left, for sure,” Viguerie told WND. “America will become closer to the European model of state control of our country.”
Schlafly and Viguerie say the GOP could decline under a flood of new immigrants, but so could the country.
“We may be at a breaking point already, I don’t know,” Schlafly said. However, she noted that she remains a Reagan optimist and doesn’t believe America will totally collapse.
Viguerie thinks the breaking point might not be that distant.
“We may be closer to that than we suspect, because Obama is on a fast track to change the voting demographics of this country by importing tens of millions of Democrat voters from South America, and so we could reach a tipping point within a few years,” he said.
“We’ve got a large percentage of people here who are not Americans, they don’t want to be Americans, they’re not assimilating, they want to keep their culture, they want to keep their language, they don’t know our history.”
Cathie Adams, the former chairwoman of the Texas Republican Party who now leads the state chapter of Eagle Forum, told a Republican group yesterday that if Texas doesn’t defy a potential Supreme Court ruling in favor of marriage equality this year, it “could be the end of America.”
“On April 28, the U.S. Supreme Court is going to hear arguments on marriage, and we expect that they’re going to do the wrong thing,” she said in at the end of a speech on Islam to the Smith County Republican Women, which was posted on YouTube by an attendee.
“Texas holds a whole lot more power and a whole lot more authority,” she said, “and if we don’t come out and do something before April 28, this could be the end of America.”
“If we don’t get this done by April 28, I don’t know that we’re going to be able to hold back what is happening,” she said. “And folks, if you are a believer, you understand what happened in Sodom and Gomorrah. You understand. And we are on the threshold. “
“I mean, young people in schools, elementary all the way through universities, are being lied to that these people are ‘born this way,’” she continued. “No, they’re not. I’ve met friends who have come out of that lifestyle, I’ve met men who are willing and ready and begging for a bill to come up in the Texas legislature that they can testify in support of in order to defend the right of parents and defend the right of those individuals who choose to seek a way out of sexual perversion.”
Drawing on the right-wing conspiracy theory that Democrats encourage non-citizens to illegally cast ballots in U.S. elections, Phyllis Schlalfy told American Family Radio today that President Obama’s executive actions on immigration are part of a larger plot to rig the vote.
The Eagle Forum founder told host Fred Jackson that the “purpose” of “Obama’s amnesty” is to help undocumented immigrants unlawfully vote: “They want to jimmy the next election by making these illegals grateful to the Democrats and able to vote, and that’s just really a change in our system that we don’t approve of. It isn’t fair, it isn’t honest, but once they have a driver’s license and a Social Security number, you can’t stop them from registering to vote.”
Ted Cruz’s father and adviser Rafael Cruz, a prominent right-wing activist in his own right, appeared on “Eagle Forum Live” this weekend with Phyllis Schlalfy, where he called on state leaders to follow Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore’s lead in flouting federal court decisions which strike down bans on same-sex marriage.
“Something very exciting that has happened is what happened in Alabama with Justice Roy Moore,” Cruz said, hailing a state supreme court ruling which found that “the courts of Alabama do not have to obey the opinion of a federal judge and as a matter of fact, Justice Roy Moore, ordered the civil courts in Alabama not to issue marriage licenses for homosexual couples. And so what they are doing is asserting that the state has supremacy and basically all of these laws were for the state to make those decisions, not the federal court, the federal court is overreaching and it is actually legislating from the bench, contrary to the opinion of the majority of the American people.”
Cruz added that states with marriage equality will begin forcing pastors to marry same-sex couples under penalty of prison, something that has never taken place in any of the dozens of states where same-sex marriage is legal.
“We need to realize that the attack on marriage is more than just an attack on marriage, it actually goes to the heart of religious freedom,” Cruz said. “What is going to come next and this is part of the danger of what may happen out of the Supreme Court in June, is that if marriage of anybody-with-anybody becomes a civil rights issue, then they are going to come to churches and force pastors to violate their religious convictions. And so it is going to come to America to where a pastor is going to be faced with a decision: do you obey a law that is not only unjust but violates your core principles, or do you obey God and face prison?”
“This is the dilemma that America’s pastors are going to be facing if this issue is labeled a civil rights issue. It goes way beyond marriage to actually violate the religious freedom of people of faith,” he continued.
Later in the program, Cruz warned that “we are on the brink of the destruction of this country” and said that President Obama is acting “like an emperor more than a president,” adding: “If we have eight more years of this type of government, this country will be destroyed.”
When a caller, Dan, called in to say that the American people should begin “killing judges” over the fear that “judges will order pastors to marry homosexuals,” Schlafly said that she is “not ready to kill anybody.”
Instead, Schlafly said that people should instead “use all the ways that are available to us in this free system.” Cruz agreed with Schlafly, arguing that elected officials are selected by “a small minority of Americans” and that people who believe in “biblical values” must turn out en masse to the polls.
On yesterday’s edition of “Focal Point,” Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly told host Bryan Fischer that state governors should simply “refuse to enforce” a Supreme Court decision striking down bans on same-sex marriage.
She also urged President Obama or whoever replaces him to direct the Attorney General to defy the court, just as the federal government should have ignored the Dred Scot ruling before the Civil War.
“We just cannot live in a country where one judge or even five judges are able to change the law of our land that goes against the laws of most of our states and we’ve had for several thousands of years about the definition of marriage, that is simply not our form of government,” Schlafly said. “We believe in ‘We The People.’”
Schlafly said that people need to “speak up and say we’re not going to put up with it” and defy judges who “think they’re God or something.” She also encouraged governors to order officials who issue marriage licenses to disobey the court’s decision.