Family Research Council

Mike Huckabee and Conservative Activists Attack Democratic Party's Marriage Equality Stance

Joining televangelist Pat Robertson who earlier today said that same-sex marriage will be the “death knell” of the Democratic Party, Mike Huckabee and other leading conservatives have denounced the party’s decision to include marriage equality in its platform. Huckabee told Tim Wildmon of the American Family Association that the move is the “best thing that’s ever happened to the Republican Party” and “may end up sinking the ship.” He said that while people tolerate people who “choose to live in lifestyles that they don’t necessarily agree with or approve of,” they are “no longer going to support” President Obama or the Democrats for having “openly declared war on biblical marriage.” “It’s to me a very tragic day,” Huckabee maintained, “when we’re so interested in getting votes form a certain community and the contributions that they’re willing to forego their own principles and just throw them overboard.”

Watch:

William Owens of the right-wing Coalition of African-American Pastors and a liaison for the National Organization for Marriage at the National Press Conference today claimed that Obama has gone down “a disgraceful road” and compared homosexuality to pedophilia:

“The time has come for a broad-based assault against the powers that be that want to change our culture to one of men marrying men and women marrying women,” said Owens, in an interview Tuesday after the launch event at the National Press Club. “I am ashamed that the first black president chose this road, a disgraceful road.”



“If you watch the men who have been caught having sex with little boys, you will note that all of them will say that they were molested as a child…” Owens said. “For the president to condone this type of thing is irresponsible.”



At the Tuesday press conference, Owens questioned Obama’s commitment to black Americans, stating that the president is just “half-black, half-white” and has long “ignored the black press.”

He is “ignoring the people that put him in the White House,” Owens said.

Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council urged Romney not to “shy away from making a clear distinction with President Obama and the Democrats on this issue.”

Thirty-two out of thirty-two states where voters have weighed in on the issue have upheld marriage as the union of one man and one woman. If President Obama were to lose those 32 states, he would face an electoral debacle. In addition, while opposition to same-sex 'marriage' may have become politically incorrect in the Democratic Party at the national level, there are many Democratic members of Congress, and office-holders further down the ticket, who live in states and districts where it will be a serious disadvantage to be identified with 'the gay marriage party.'

Gov. Romney, who has signed a pledge to support a marriage protection amendment to the U.S. Constitution, should not shy away from making a clear distinction with President Obama and the Democrats on this issue.

As always, the American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer didn’t hold back in his column, warning that through its decision to “embrace moral perversion” it has “sealed its own doom and relegated itself to the ash heap of history” as its founder Thomas Jefferson “must be rolling over in his personal parchment copy of the Declaration of Independence.”

Rarely can you identify a moment in time at which a major political party sealed its own doom and relegated itself to the ash heap of history. Today is that day for the Democratic Party. The party of Thomas Jefferson, who once wrote a law calling for the castration of those who committed the infamous crime against nature, has now enshrined sodomy-based marriage in its party platform.

Jefferson must be rolling over in his personal parchment copy of the Declaration of Independence, which celebrates the unalienable, God-given right to liberty, not licentiousness.

We know from data collected by the Centers for Disease Control that homosexual conduct is as dangerous to human health as intravenous drug abuse. Of all the men ever diagnosed with HIV/AIDS since the “epidemic” began, 90% contracted it either through having sex with other men (60%), injection drug use (22%) or both (8%). Thus the Democratic Party has made a noble virtue out of behavior that is immoral, unnatural, and unhealthy, and will destroy the lives of those who engage in it.

For the Democratic Party to enshrine the infamous crime against nature in its party platform is the final nail in the coffin of a party that in its history has defended slavery and racism (the KKK was a Democratic institution) and filibustered Civil Rights legislation in the 1960s. This move signals its permanent slide into political oblivion.



Every Democratic candidate for the House and the Senate needs to be pinned down by both the media and Republican opponents. The GOP needs to hang gay marriage like an anvil around the neck of every Democratic candidate for higher office. Any Democrat who tries to swim with that tied around his neck will find his candidacy seeking to the bottom of the sea. Republicans, force them to declare themselves, and either embrace moral perversion or reject their own party.

Freedom for 'Phobes

It has been known for years that Chick-fil-A supports right-wing groups. The company has given out gift cards at the Family Research Council’s Values Voter Summit. At a recent Religious Right gathering, a speaker talked about how wonderful it was to live and work in Atlanta, where, he said, there’s a Baptist church on every corner and the streets are paved with Chick-fil-A.

So I am no fan of Chick-fil-A, but I’m a big fan of freedom, and that includes Chick-fil-A’s freedom to open its restaurants, even in cities where progressive political leaders don’t like the reactionary politics promoted by the company and its owners.

There’s been a robust campaign by advocates for LGBT equality to call more attention to Chick-fil-A’s contributions to “traditional family” groups, which total in the millions of dollars. But the feathers really flew when company president Dan Cathy made comments in an interview with Baptist Press bragging about his company’s position on marriage – “guilty as charged” -- and his comments to an Atlanta radio station.

I think we are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at him and say, ‘We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage,’” said Cathy.

I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we would have the audacity to try to redefine what marriage is all about,” he added.

It’s no surprise that Cathy’s comments have stirred supporters of LGBT equality to respond. Much of that response has been in the best traditions of free speech and protest. In Washington, D.C., this week, the Human Rights Campaign organized a protest in front of a Chick-Fil-A food truck. Other activists have rallied outside Chick-Fil-A stores and some students have protested the company’s presence on their campuses.

In addition, a number of political leaders have spoken out in defense of marriage equality and in opposition to the company’s support for discrimination. Twenty years ago, I would never have imagined elected officials taking the time to publicly criticize a business on behalf of the ability of same-sex couples to get married. It’s a good thing – a sign of amazing progress.

But a couple of politicians have gone too far – suggesting that the power of government should be used to prevent the company from opening restaurants based on its political donations and the positions of its owners. That’s not a good thing. As a matter of principle, the government shouldn’t treat individuals differently based on their political or religious beliefs, or companies based on the political activities and contributions of their owners.  As others have noted, we wouldn’t want cities or states to have the power to prevent the opening of stores whose owners support LGBT equality or other progressive causes. 

People For the American Way’s headquarters is located in the District of Columbia, where elected officials have recognized that LGBT people should be treated equally under the law. DC’s progressive public policies stand in stark contrast to the anti-equality work of groups like the Family Research Council, but we would never suggest that the DC government could or should have prevented FRC from planting its headquarters in the center of downtown DC. Our commitment to freedom and equality should extend to those who don’t share it.

PFAW Foundation

Anti-Gay Groups Prepare for Potential Ohio Referendum on Marriage Ban

Focus on the Family’s CitizenLink, the Alliance Defending Freedom (formerly Alliance Defense Fund), the Family Research Council and the Ohio-based Citizens for Community Values are planning six seminars in Ohio over the coming months to train Culture Impact Teams and “answer the cry of a culture that needs help.”

While FRC’s Tony Perkins and Focus on the Family founder James Dobson won’t be attending in person, they have sent messages, including this one from Dobson condemning an effort to repeal the state’s ban on same-sex marriage by referendum in 2013:

Traditional marriage is on the line. Will your church help guarantee its future?

Will you help us organize and mobilize your county to answer the cry of a culture that needs help?

Will you join a growing network of Ohio Pastors, church staff and laymen to be a witness in a hurting culture and defend issues that threaten our families, our faith, and our freedom?

SIX, FREE training seminars for pastors, church staff and laymen to launch a Culture Impact Team (CIT). Learn alongside other church leaders how to defend family, faith and freedom during this critical election year.

Confirmed guest speakers include: Attorney Matt Rawlings (Alliance Defending Freedom, formerly Alliance Defense Fund), former Congressman Bill Redmond (Focus on the Family), and National Field Director Randy Wilson (Family Research Council), Pastor J. C. Church, former Representative Seth Morgan and CCV President Phil Burress.

Additional perks: Hear about Watchmen on the Wall, an FRC ministry that supports the local pastor. –Access to sermon starters and research on the issues facing our families and culture. –CIT

Manual to multiply your leadership and influence in your church and community-A Voter Impact Toolkit DVD, containing 12 high quality videos you can pick from to encourage your church, as well as all you need to do a Christian Citizenship Sunday.

Are Boycotts Moral? For the Religious Right, It Depends on Who They're Targeting

Last year, Liberty Counsel and the Family Research Council were outraged — outraged! — when gay rights advocates began pressuring companies to end their ties to a so-called charity group called the CGBG, which funds anti-gay organizations including LC and FRC. The two groups urged retailers to “remain neutral in the culture wars” and accused gay rights supporters of “economic terrorism.” The FRC even created a website where activists could call on companies to “remain neutral in the current cultural battles, thus enabling you to focus on business and not force consumers to make purchasing choices based on corporate political agendas.”

Of course, both LC and FRC had organized and endorsed similar pressure campaigns against corporations in the past, but apparently those didn’t constitute “economic terrorism.”

As Chick-fil-A, a company that bankrolls anti-gay groups and whose CEO has said marriage equality is inviting God’s judgment, faces a national backlash for its opposition to gay rights, once again the Religious Right is employing an almost pathetic use of double standards.

The National Organization for Marriage, which literally has two campaigns dedicated to boycotting Starbucks and General Mills for refusing to stay “neutral” in the marriage equality debate, is now outraged that gay rights activists are boycotting Chick-fil-A.

NOM's state affiliate in Minnesota organized a protest outside of the corporate headquarters of General Mills and in a letter to Minnesota corporations, NOM asked that companies “stay neutral and respect the conscience rights of your customers and employees who are on both sides” of a proposed state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

Another group shockingly outraged by protests targeting Chick-fil-A is the American Family Association.

The AFA and its subgroups One Million Moms and One Million Dads have boycotted countless companies, most recently leading boycotts and pressure campaigns against Home Depot, Ford, GAP, Macy's, JC Penney for their advertising campaigns and efforts to create inclusive work environments “rather than remain neutral in the culture war,” and against DC, Marvel and Archie Comics for including gay characters.

In fact, the AFA goes so far as to claim, without any evidence, that it’s pressure campaign is responsible for financial problems at JC Penney.

So the question needs to be asked, did the AFA, in the words of its spokesman Bryan Fischer, "go Ahmadinejad" on JC Penney, Home Depot and Archie?

Religious Right's Chick-fil-A Chicanery

It always amazes us how Religious Right activists present themselves as fearless defenders of the truth, but constantly run away from and flat out deny statements that cause controversy.

Take the recent dispute over Chick-fil-A.

Not only does the company finance anti-gay groups, but CEO Dan Cathy has said that same-sex marriage is “inviting God’s judgment on our nation” because we “shake our fist at Him,” calling support for marriage equality a “tragic” a sign that God “left us to a depraved mind.”

Rather than defend these remarks, social conservatives groups are simply denying that Cathy ever uttered anything critical of gay rights or derogatory of the gay community.

American Family Association president Tim Wildmon yesterday maintained that gay rights supporters are only upset about the statement he gave to Baptist Press and ignored his earlier remarks:

Similarly, the Family Research Council’s prayer team claimed Cathy “said not one negative word about homosexuals nor homosexuality”:

Finally, you've probably seen reaction to Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy's declaration of support for Biblical marriage. He said not one negative word about homosexuals nor homosexuality. Rather, he said, "The Chick-fil-A culture and service tradition in our restaurants is to treat every person with honor, dignity and respect - regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender." Nevertheless, makers of the Muppets have withdrawn their partnership, and the mayor of Boston, has banned Chick-fil-A from coming to his city. Meanwhile, Internet monster Google has launched a worldwide "Legalize Love" campaign aimed at breaking down legal barriers to homosexuality in countries with moral objections. Also, J.C. Penney, which endorsed same-sex "marriage" has seen its stock go through the floor. Microsoft, which did likewise, has experienced its first quarterly loss in the company's history (Thigh will be Done, Come What Mayo, Irony of the Tolerance Police, Google). Please join us in celebrating Mike Huckabee's Wednesday, August 1, Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day. And thank you for praying!

Tea Party Nation president Judson Phillips endorsed “Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day” by falsely asserting that Cathy “has not said at least publicly that he opposes gay marriage”:

The left is now making war in Chic fil A. They do not like it that the President of Chic fil A came out against gay marriage. Dan Cathy, like his father who founded Chic fil A is a devout protestant Christian and he supports traditional marriage and family values. He has not said at least publicly that he opposes gay marriage, only that he supports traditional marriage.

If conservative leaders are so proud and supportive of Dan Cathy’s views, then why are they so intent on avoiding any mention of his unambiguously anti-gay statements?

Boykin: Obama Undermining Military because it's the 'Last Bastion of Morality and Ethics'

Jerry Boykin talked about his new job as the executive vice president of the Family Research Council with FRC president Tony Perkins on Friday’s Washington Watch Weekly, where he said he will work to stop the Obama administration’s plans to “to penetrate this last bastion of morality and ethics, and that being the institution of the military, with its social experiments.” “If we allow the penetration of our military to continue,” Boykin added, “not only will our national security suffer but our culture as a whole will be in great jeopardy.” Boykin and Perkins later agreed that the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell will have devastating long term effects (despite all existing evidence) and that it undermined the sense of fellowship and camaraderie among service members.

Boykin: The administration has been on a campaign, I think, to penetrate this last bastion of morality and ethics, and that being the institution of the military, with its social experiments. So I’m very concerned and obviously as you and I have talked, one of my main focuses here will be trying to protect and defend and work with our military to try and maintain the values that our military has always had. I think it’s a warning to America that if we allow the penetration of our military to continue, not only will our national security suffer but our culture as a whole will be in great jeopardy.



Perkins: The history that we, you and I, have developed really goes back to when the administration wanted to overturn the policy that prohibited open homosexuality in the military and we pulled together a number of retired generals and there was some active duty individuals in there as well that were part of just advising and consulting. But that is so significant in terms of something that’s inconsistent with military service, readiness; the seeds have now been planted, while some are saying ‘it’s been almost a year and the military hasn’t imploded,’ that’s unrealistic, the effects of this are a number of years down the road, we’re already, however, seeing the erosion of religious liberty and religious freedom. Those are issues that folks who serve can’t speak to so they need a voice on the outside.

Boykin: Well, that’s right. People need to understand that when you are a member of the military service you do lose certain First Amendment rights and I don’t disagree with that, I lived with it for thirty six and a half years, but somebody has to speak for them. Tony, I think it’s important for us to remember, I don’t care and I know you don’t what people do behind closed doors in the privacy of their own bedroom, but as an institution the military is based on brotherhood, it’s based on camaraderie, it’s based on the strength and the character of the individual organizations that make up our military. No one has demonstrated that this in anyway is going to enhance the camaraderie, the fellowship, the brotherhood, nor is it going to enhance the war fighting capabilities. At the end of the day, the military’s only mission is going to fight and win the nation’s wars, and no one can show that this is going to help us.

Perkins: Google Trying to 'Destroy' Values with Gay Rights Initiative, Should Expect 'Blow Back'

On his daily radio bulletin, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins joined other Religious Right activists in condemning Google for its Legalize Love campaign to advocate against laws criminalizing homosexuality. “Thanks to a new campaign, Google's approach to traditional values is to search—and destroy,” Perkins said, and later baselessly claimed that companies which favor gay rights “take a financial hit” and warned that Google “shouldn’t be surprised by the blow back” for its decision. After defending countries that criminalize homosexuality, Perkins said that “political neutrality is what most users are searching for,” even though the FRC lauds and commends companies like Chik-fil-A which get involved in political efforts opposing gay rights.

Earlier, the American Family Association’s Buster Wilson weighed a Google boycott and Janet Porter of Faith2Action urged listeners to stop making Google searches and using Gmail.

After years on the Internet, Google is stepping into a different domain—politics. Hello, I'm Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council in Washington. Thanks to a new campaign, Google's approach to traditional values is to search—and destroy. The web giant just kicked off a worldwide push called "Legalize Love," aimed at breaking down the barriers to homosexuality around the globe. Their biggest targets? Countries that have moral objections to same-sex relationships. "We want our employees who are gay or lesbian or transgender to have the same experience outside the office as they do in the office," said a spokesman. That means actively fighting laws in other countries that aren't as gay-friendly as Google would like. After watching Target and J.C. Penney take a financial hit after endorsing same-sex marriage, Google should know better. They can push to "Legalize Love," but they shouldn't be surprised by the blow back. Because when it comes to Google, political neutrality is what most users are searching for.

Michele Bachmann's Smear of Huma Abedin: From Fringe Conspiracy to the Halls of Congress

Rep. Michele Bachmann’s much-maligned witch hunt against Muslim-Americans working in the Obama administration, including top State Department official Huma Abedin, is the outgrowth of a festering conspiracy theory that has been gaining traction in right-wing circles, where Obama is viewed as an ally of the Muslim Brotherhood if not a secret Muslim himself.

One of the main perpetrators is Frank Gaffney, whose Center for Security Policy is cited by Bachmann in her letter to the inspector general [pdf]. Gaffney is a birther have resulted in him being driven out of even conservative gatherings. He believes that President Obama is “America’s first Muslim President” who is leading an Islamist left-wing “Red-Green axis” and intends to become a dictator. Not only does Gaffney think that Muslims should be prosecuted for practicing Sharia and that New Jersey’s Republican governor Chris Christie is guilty of “misprision of treason” for appointing a Muslim-American judge, but he also seeks the establishment of a House Anti-American Activities Committee. While speaking with Family Research Council vice president Jerry Boykin earlier this month, Gaffney asked Boykin about Huma Abedin’s “very extensive ties, family and personal, to the Muslim Brotherhood” and identified her as an “enemy inside the wire.”

Gaffney: General Boykin, we were talking before the break about an issue that I know as we’ve been discussing is of great concern to you, the Muslim Brotherhood and its rise, the extent to which it is being enabled in that rise by the Obama administration. I’d like to turn to a subject that I know you’ve also given a lot of thought to, particularly as a man who has spent many years as an intelligence professional, namely the counter-intelligence threat posed by the Brotherhood in our own country. Recently as you know Rush Limbaugh has lit up an individual with very extensive ties, family and personal, to the Muslim Brotherhood and who is at the moment the deputy chief of staff to the Secretary of State, her name is Huma Abedin. What do you make, as an intelligence professional, make of what is going on here. Huma Abedin is not alone as we’ve identified in our course, the Muslim Brotherhood in America: the Enemy Within, there are a number of others, but what is going on here and why is the Obama administration seemingly so clueless about this enemy inside the wire?

Boykin, a proponent of banning mosques and stripping Muslim-Americans of their First Amendment rights and a consistent purveyor of wild and outlandish conspiracies, said Huma Abedin’s position is proof that “there is support for the infiltration of the Muslim Brotherhood into our government.”

Boykin: I would not begin to try and explain the actions of the administration because it is beyond anything that I can possibly claim. Secondly, Huma [Abedin] is not the only person who has penetrated our government and if you go back to the explanatory memorandum that is in our book, Sharia: The Threat, which was discovered in Annandale, Virginia in the archives of the Muslim Brotherhood, one of their strategies was to penetrate our government and they have done so. If my mother or father was a known member of the Muslim Brotherhood it is highly unlikely that I would ever be able to get a security clearance so you have to ask yourself, why is this individual able to do that when no one else can possibly do that. So there is a willful blindness to what is happening. I believe in some aspects of this situation there is support for the infiltration of the Muslim Brotherhood into our government, that sounds extremist but it is just a fact, it’s a reality.

So while Bachmann’s reprehensible and baseless charges against Abedin and other officials may be raising eyebrows in Congress and even among her fellow Republicans, they are nothing new on the right.

Boykin Wonders if Obama is a Member of the Muslim Brotherhood

Family Research Council’s new vice president Jerry Boykin has a penchant for making bizarre, conspiratorial claims about President Obama and extremist attacks on Muslims, and at a Massachusetts synagogue last week even wondered whether President Obama is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. Responding to a questioner who asked if Obama is “a member of the Muslim Brotherhood,” Boykin replied, “you probably don’t know, and my answer is, I don’t know.”

He went on to allege that Jeremiah Wright brought Nation of Islam theology into the United Church of Christ, and that the NOI is based on the teachings of James Cone, a Christian theologian who was born after the founding of the NOI. Boykin denied that Obama attended a real Christian church and instead claimed Wright surreptitiously preached Cone’s crypto-Islamic theology, and so for Obama “it wouldn’t of mattered whether he was in the Nation of Islam or was in a Christian Church, he got the same theology, which was James Cone’s Marxist, liberation theology, which runs parallel to the whole doctrine of Islam.”

Watch:

Update: Wil Gafney writes in Religion Dispatches that not only did Boykin grossly misrepresent black liberation theology, but also that Wright was never a member of the Nation of Islam.

Perkins on Obama: 'I am Amazed that this Man is the President of the United States'

Family Research Council president Tony Perkins has called President Obama the “worst president this country has ever had” and warned that America will not “have a future as a country” if Obama is re-elected because his administration “will destroy this country.” Perkins even said that Christian Obama supporters must “repent” for electing a president who “has a disdain for Christianity.” And so today it was no surprise that after Perkins and co-host Tim Wildmon, the president of American Family Association, played an out of context portion of a recent Obama speech, he said he’s “amazed that this man is the President of the United States.” Wildmon also chimed in, maintaining that Obama is “oozing with envy and jealousy” and claiming it “was so un-American what he just spouted.” In the address, Obama was referring to the importance of government investment in education, infrastructure and technology in growing the economy, but right-wing detractors have twisted his speech into an attack on businessmen.

Wildmon: That was just, he was all over the map, that’s just class warfare, he was oozing with envy and jealously, he was stirring up the crowd to be against people who have created wealth for themselves and for others.

Perkins: I am amazed that this man is the President of the United States.

Wildmon: As am I. That was so un-American what he just spouted, in keeping with our traditions. And he created a straw man there too to knock down, saying that people who are wealthy ‘think they are so smart and they work so much harder, and I’m here to tell you that they don’t and it’s time for them to pay their fair share by golly and I’m going to make it happen because I’m the President.’ Well, anyway, so much for the years of Ronald Reagan’s optimism, morning in America talks.

Tony Perkins Pushes Bizarre Student Loan Conspiracy

In 2010, Congress codified the Affordable Care Act by passing the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, which included an amended version of the health care reform bill along with student loan reform. Before passing the act, banks served as middlemen between the government and students seeking loans for higher education, but the reform law cuts out the middleman and created a system of direct loans, saving taxpayers billions of dollars. Seemingly unable to come up with an argument against a system that is more beneficial to taxpayers and fairer to students, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins today warned, without any evidence at all, that the government is trying to use student loan reform to pressure Christian colleges to “provide coverage for abortions, sterilizations, or sex changes” and “advance the agenda of the Left by excluding” students attending Christian schools from the loan program:

King Solomon said - much study is wearisome to the flesh maybe that explains the connection between college loans and healthcare. Hello, this is Tony Perkins with the Family Research Council in Washington. Many people were puzzled to learn that student loans in America had been commandeered by the federal government. Even stranger was that the takeover was a part of the huge 2,700 page health care takeover known as Obamacare. What are student loans to do with nationalizing health care? Well, quite a bit if you think about it. Look down the road ten years. Imagine you want to send your son or daughter to a small Christian college that does not provide coverage for abortions, sterilizations, or sex changes. Will such institutions be approved for students who attend who are using federal loans? The takeover of student loans is just one more way to advance the agenda of the Left by excluding others. It is not studying that is so wearisome - it is the relentless push of the Left that's truly wearisome.

FRC Names Anti-Islam Conspiracy Theorist as Executive Vice President

Jerry Boykin is best-known around here for being a militantly anti-Islam Religious Right activist who likes to spread all sorts of conspiracy theories about how the Council on Foreign Relations intentionally triggered a global economic crisis in order to help Barack Obama win the election so that he could establish an army of Brownshirts loyal only to him though the passage of Health Care Reform.

So obviously this is exactly the sort of man that the Family Research Council wants overseeing its day-to-day operations, which is why FRC has named Boykin its new Executive Vice President:

Lt. Gen. William "Jerry" Boykin has been appointed Family Research Council's executive vice president, the organization announced Friday at a press event. Besides overseeing the day-to-day operations at FRC, Boykin's extensive military experience will provide the organization with greater expertise to address social issues in the military.

UPDATE: FRC has released an official announcement:

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins is pleased to announce today that Lt. Gen. (USA Ret.) William G. "Jerry" Boykin has joined Family Research Council as its Executive Vice President. In this role, he will oversee day-to-day operations including policy, finance, development, communications, human resources, facilities, information technology, constituent communications and services.

Of Boykin, Perkins said:

"We are very excited and pleased to announce that Lt. General Boykin is joining Family Research Council's leadership team," said FRC President Tony Perkins, a Marine veteran. "The depth of his leadership skills, forged under the most demanding circumstances, combined with his passion for faith, family and freedom, will greatly enhance FRC's effectiveness and impact in Washington and beyond."

General Boykin was one of the original members of the U.S. Army's Delta Force. He was privileged ultimately to command these elite warriors in combat operations. Later, Jerry Boykin commanded all the Army's Green Berets as well as the Special Warfare Center and School. His last four years in the Army were spent in Washington, D.C. as the U.S. Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence.

"I am honored to join the country's premier Christian public policy organization dedicated to strengthening the family, defending life and advancing freedom," said Boykin. "As I ponder the future that my six grandchildren will grow up in, I realize how important it is that I do my part to restore the values that made America a great nation. This is why I am honored to help advance Family Research Council's mission of faith, family and freedom."

Additionally Lt. Gen. Boykin will assist FRC in its expanded role of advocating for the men and women who continue to serve in our nation's military.

"The Obama administration has undermined our nation's security and increased the risk to those who serve by systematically using our nation's military to advance a liberal social agenda. There is no one better equipped to speak on behalf of those who serve our nation in uniform and advocate for policies that uphold our national security than General Boykin," concluded Perkins.

Desperate Religious Right Activists Say Military is Endangered by Having Service Members Share Barracks with Gay Soldiers

Ron Crews, the executive director of the Chaplains Alliance for Religious Liberty and a former Republican politician, appeared alongside Family Research Council president Tony Perkins today on Washington Watch Weekly to push back against reports showing that only a small number of chaplains say they have been negatively impacted by the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. While the Religious Right’s prediction that the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell would have catastrophic consequences on the military and national security contradicts nearly all of the evidence, Crews insisted that President Obama and his appointees are “turning our military into a social experiment to promote the cause of the homosexual agenda in this country” at “the expense ultimately of what our military is intended to do and that is to provide for the protection of this country, to defend this nation.” Later, Crews said that the military may experience a significant decline in “retention and recruitment” because parents will not want their children to serve in a “two-man barrack, a two person barrack, where they may be placed with a homosexual soldier.”

Perkins: The Department of Defense is kind of suppressing these differing views, only kind of giving a platform to those who are embracing this new policy, where do you think that pressure is coming from within the Department of Defense?

Crews: It’s coming from the very top. The senior leaders of the military are all presidential appointees, the senior attorney, Jeh Johnson, of the military is a presidential appointee. So these senior leaders fall in line with the president and his policy, who is turning our military into a social experiment, I believe, at the expense ultimately of what our military is intended to do and that is to provide for the protection of this country, to defend this nation. The current administration is turning our military into a social experiment to promote the cause of the homosexual agenda in this country. I am very concerned about the direction that the current administration has been leading our military over the last couple of years.



Crews: The jury is still out. I’m concerned about long-term retention and recruitment. How many moms and dads are going to want their children to go into a military where their son or daughter may be in a barrack that they have no control over, in a two-man barrack, a two person barrack, where they may be placed with a homosexual soldier and they have no recourse, so we’re concerned.

Tony Perkins Blasts General Mills for Opposing Anti-Gay Amendment

General Mills was immediately attacked when it announced its opposition to a proposed amendment in Minnesota, where the company is based, that would enshrine the state’s ban on same-sex marriage in its constitution. National Organization for Marriage president Brian Brown called the move “ludicrous” and claimed that the company “effectively declared a war on marriage” and Minnesota for Marriage began holding protests to “Dump General Mills.” Today, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council weighed in during his daily radio bulletin by attacking the cereal company for becoming a “general nuisance”:

Perkins: In the marriage debate, General Mills just became a general nuisance. Hello, I'm Tony Perkins with the Family Research Council in Washington. One of America's largest food companies has an appetite for liberal politics. Five months before voters head to the polls, General Mills decided to weigh in on Minnesota's marriage amendment. Like Starbucks, the company tried to argue that marriage is bad for business--a theory that's absolutely ridiculous. Forbes magazine did a feature on the "best states for business"--and 18 of the top 20 protect natural marriage. Still, a spokesman says, "We don't believe the proposed constitutional amendment is in the best interests of our employees or our state economy... We oppose it." Experts say it's a "very risky" position--especially since General Mills makes billions of dollars marketing brands to parents of kids--like Betty Crocker, Pillsbury, Green Giant, Yoplait, Cheerios, Chex, Wheaties, and Lucky Charms. It may impress their corporate friends, but it's customers that count.

Perkins: Health Care Reform is a 'Time-Bomb of Destruction for our Nation'

We have spent most of the day collecting reactions from the Religious Right to today's Supreme Court ruling upholding the constitutionality of health care reform legislation and listening to hours of radio programs as movement leaders try to understand what happened, what it all means, and where to go next.

Based on what we have heard from them today, the emerging narrative seems to be that the ruling itself was awful and wrongly decided, but that it will ultimately end up doing more harm than good for President Obama as he seeks re-election by leading to a resurgence of Tea Party activism and and landslide for candidates running for office who will vow to repeal the legislation.

Tony Perkins summed it up when he explained on today's radio program that it was Congress and President Obama who were responsible for this legislation that "is a time-bomb of destruction for our nation" and must be replaced in November:

We're right to be disappointed and frustrated by the Court's decision, but it was Congress that did this to begin with. It was Barack Obama who did this to begin with, so I think we've got to go back and put this around them, making them responsible for something that almost 70% of Americans oppose.

We do have a way to correct this, and it's called the election in November. And folks, I'm going to tell you, if you're apathetic and you think "well, I'm not going to vote because I've got a choice between this one and that one and there's not that much difference," there is a difference! Barack Obama is responsible for this health care bill which is going to strip you of your rights as an American citizen in the ability to make your own decisions. It is an infringement upon religious freedom. We have rationing boards that are going to be put in place. These are not seeds, this is a time-bomb of destruction for our nation and President Obama is responsible for it.

Peter LaBarbera Rebukes Tony Perkins for Rebuking Rand Paul

Last month, shortly after President Obama announced his support for marriage equality, Sen. Rand Paul spoke at an Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition event where he joked that he "wasn’t sure that [Obama's] views on marriage could get any gayer."

A few days later, the Family Research Council's Tony Perkins was asked about the remark on "Face the Nation" where he mildly rebuked Paul, saying “I don’t think this is something we should joke about. We are talking about individuals who feel very strongly one way or the other, and I think we should be civil, respectful, allowing all sides to have the debate.”

Perkins' criticism of Paul has, in turn, angered Peter LaBarbera who told Sandy Rios last week that "we need to be praising Republicans who speak out on homosexual marriage and the gay agenda, we shouldn't be chastising them": 

This makes me sad, Sandy. I like Tony Perkins, I like the work he does at Family Research Council but the Left started criticizing Rand Paul for joking about gays and then Tony Perkins was asked about it on "Face The Nation," I think [by] Bob Schieffer," and he criticized Rand Paul and said this is not a joking matter and I just have to disagree you. You just played the tape; Rand Paul didn't do anything wrong. The President's positions on homosexual marriage have been almost comical; he was for homosexual marriage before he was against it now he's for it again. So, and Rand Paul obviously spoke with compassion, he said this is not about hating people so it really troubled me to see Tony Perkins cave in to the liberal media and criticize Rand Paul when, you're absolutely right, we need to be praising Republicans who speak out on homosexual marriage and the gay agenda, we shouldn't be chastising them.

FRC's Maginnis: Gay Pride Month in Military Leads to 'Dysfunction' and 'Undermines Morale'

Bob Maginnis of the Family Research Council spoke to Lee Webb of CBN News this week about the Defense Department’s decision to recognize June as Gay Pride Month, warning that it is part of a plan by gays and lesbians “to advance their radical agenda.” The FRC senior fellow began the interview by falsely claiming that a Pentagon survey “found that there would be many that would leave and some that would reconsider” if Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is repealed, however, the survey actually noted that very few service members would consider leaving the military and an Army Times survey following the policy’s repeal found that number to be even lower. Maginnis went on to claim that “if homosexuals want to parade their homosexuality as their defining characteristic of who they are rather than that they’re a soldier or sailor” it would lead to “dysfunction” and undermine “cohesion, trust” and “morale” by upsetting those who believe gays are “not pleasing to God.”

Watch:

Webb: Is it your prediction that many in the service, not just chaplains but those who are religiously opposed, morally opposed to homosexual behavior will be leaving the ranks soon because of this?

Maginnis: Certainly the survey that the Pentagon did found that there would be many that would leave and some that would reconsider. A lot depends upon what the homosexual community does within the ranks of the military, are they going to use this to advance their radical agenda or are they going to be quiet about it and blend in? Keep in mind, the military is about removing distinctions among people, we works as teams, we try to accomplish things as crews and units and not as individuals. Unfortunately, if you stick out, if you make your particular behavior or profile to be an anomaly in a unit, whether it be homosexual or anything, you’re really not a team member, so we’ll have to wait and see.

Webb: In keep with what you just said, it seems like they are not willing to be part of a unit if they are seeking recognition through a Gay Pride Month, is that the way you’re seeing this?

Maginnis: I am concerned about the conformity to military standards because after all the military is about removing those distinctions, fighting and being prepared to fight across the world as one type of unit. If homosexuals want to parade their homosexuality as their defining characteristic of who they are rather than that they’re a soldier or sailor, then that’s dysfunction. It undermines cohesion, trust and confidence; it undermines morale. Of course, for those in the military that are people of faith, it also runs contrary to that very faith. I am very concerned about the promotion of homosexual marriage, about the removal of the idea that heterosexuals and homosexuals are different, well in fact they are and those of us of faith have reason to believe that those distinctions are not pleasing to God.

Huckabee: The EPA Might Tell Baptists They're Using too Much Water

Last night, the Family Research Council hosted a webcast entitled "Two Weeks for Freedom: Catholics and Evangelicals Together for Freedom" that was billed as kicking off "a two week period of nationwide prayer and action in support of religious liberty" by mobilizing conservative Christians to oppose the Obama administration's contraception mandate.

The first guest on the program was Mike Huckabee, who declared that it was become clear that "this administration is not just indifferent to people of faith, it's hostile" and warning that if all Christians don't stand beside the Catholic Church in opposing the mandate, then next the EPA might be telling Baptists that they can no longer use water for their baptism ceremonies:

Rep. Huelskamp Claims the Left Plans to 'Repeal any Religious Liberties or any Religious Values' in America

Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-TX) today spoke to the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins and the American Family Association’s Tim Wildmon about the sale of bibles in LifeWay stores, which is affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention. The stores were selling Bibles with the emblems of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps. However, the store’s permission to use such trademarks “was revoked when the military revamped its trademark licensing regulations in 2011.”

A LifeWay spokesman told Fox News that “after selling existing inventory of those bibles, B&H [Publishing] replaced the official seals with generic insignias which continue to sell well and provide spiritual guidance and comfort to those who serve.” The Defense Department also “stressed that the revocation was solely a trademark issue.”

But Religious Right groups instead are blaming the decision on the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, and Huelskamp alleged that the Obama administration is the main culprit. He said that “folks on the left” would “like to delete, exclude and repeal any religious liberties or any religious values throughout our entire government and our entire society,” and argued that the administration seeks to use the military as a “training ground for a radical, leftist agenda.”

Perkins and Huelskamp later twisted the story to claim that soldiers are now being deprived of Bibles, even though the only thing that changed was the logo and not the publication, and suggested that the move could contribute to mental health problems and suicide among soldiers.

Perkins: Your thoughts on this latest attack, it’s the only way I can describe it, on the religious freedom of men and women who serve in the military?

Huelskamp: You just mentioned in a way it was simply a capitulation and the fact that the Department of the Defense and this administration will bend over backwards to protect, I guess, the rights of atheists to determine our policies in the military, which simply does an incredible disservice to the brave men and women who defend and guarantee our rights. The idea that a particular Bible is a national security threat, that would be silly if it wasn’t so serious in terms of the threats that are coming from the folks on the left that would like to delete, exclude and repeal any religious liberties or any religious values throughout our entire government and our entire society, it is a real threat to the future of this country I believe.



Huelskamp: I believe that the only way Washington is going to respond is if something will happen will happen at the polls this Fall.

Wildmon: So you think this is a reflection of the Obama administration through the Pentagon, capitulating on this?

Huelskamp: I believe so, and we see that through other agencies. You have these leftist groups from the outside and somehow they get word about something and then they come in and send these threatening letters and then the administration says ‘well my goodness I think you’re right.’ This happens in the military, I believe it happens other ways as well. It’s a cultural issue, it’s an issue of whether we’re going to just change the way Americans think and we’re going to use, in this case, the military as our training ground for a radical, leftist agenda.



Perkins: The very thing that can help our members of the military deal with these issues is being driven from the military, it makes absolutely no sense.

Wildmon: Congressman, are you on a committee that oversees this kind of thing?

Huelskamp: I am not; I serve on the veterans’ affairs committee as well for folks that finished their military service. Suicide is a real concern. When you separate people from their faith and separate people from their Creator, you expect bad things to happen. Tony is definitely right, the real folks that lose out on this are the men and women that need this truth and need this faith. In the past, in the history of our country, it’s been understood. I have an uncle that’s a chaplain, he’s served in multiple conflicts and has been there and understands as many other chaplains do that this is our role is to protect the faith of our brave men and women. And here they are defending religious liberty and freedom around the world and at home, in their own backyard it is under attack.

Tony Perkins Praises ExxonMobil's 'Courage' for not 'Fueling the Homosexual Agenda'

Family Research Council president Tony Perkins on his daily radio bulletin applauded ExxonMobil shareholders for voting down a proposal to prohibit job discrimination based sexual orientation, even claiming that the vote was part of a “backlash” against President Obama’s endorsement of marriage equality. By not “fueling the homosexual agenda,” Perkins said the oil giant’s decision showed “courage” and was a “stand for true American values.”

Perkins: At ExxonMobil, the shareholders put their stock in something other than political correctness. Hello, I'm Tony Perkins in the Family Research Council in Washington. It won't change the price of gas, but it may comfort you to know that at ExxonMobil, your business isn't fueling the homosexual agenda. At Exxon's annual meeting, shareholders refused to add special protections based upon "sexual orientation" to the employment policy. It was the 13th straight year the company wouldn't cave to the pressure. While the outcome wasn't a surprise, the margin of victory certainly was. Eighty percent of the company voted "no"--that was the highest number since 1999. That was a huge shock to liberals who were pushing the change, who said the resolution had 40% support in years past. But that was before the President forced Americans into a debate about homosexual marriage. Now, the backlash is starting to show, and it's not just political. Maybe Exxon's courage will fuel other companies to stand for true American values.
Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious