Family Research Council

Family Research Council Attacks 'Burger Queen' For 'Catering To A Fringe Group' During LGBT Pride Month

The Family Research Council is adding its voice to growing outrage from the Religious Right over Burger King’s unveiling of the LGBT Pride Month-themed Proud Whopper.

In the prepared text of FRC president Tony Perkins’ daily radio bulletin, posted on the group’s website today, Perkins asks: “Is it Burger King or Burger Queen?

When Burger King says "have it your way," they aren't just talking about food. Hello, I'm Tony Perkins with the Family Research Council in Washington. Is it Burger King or Burger Queen? Customers in San Francisco aren't so sure after the chain's new Proud Whopper. Local stores unveiled the rainbow menu to coincide with LGBT week. Although nothing's different about the burger, executives hope the wrapper will make a statement. But even in liberal San Francisco, Time reports, some customers have a beef with the burgers. "If that's what they're gonna do," said one person, "they won't [have] my business anymore." That's the beauty of the free market. If Burger King wants to cater to a fringe group at the expense of other customers, that's their choice. Just like it's Cracker Barrel's decision to support natural marriage and the celebrities who advocate it. The problem is those companies who say they believe in debate and then try to silence it. That's the biggest whopper of them all.

In his audio version of the remarks, Perkins dropped the swipe at “Burger Queen,” but still suggested that the fast-food company will face boycotts for supporting LGBT Pride Month.

Jerry Boykin Wants To Know Why The US Didn't Kill Bowe Bergdahl

Yesterday, The Daily Caller posted an interview that Ginni Thomas conducted with the Family Research Council's Jerry Boykin in which he called for President Obama to be impeached over the Veterans Affairs scandal and Benghazi while wondering why captured Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl was not killed by the US government like Anwar al-Awlaki had been.

As Boykin sees it, the trade of five Taliban leaders in exchange for Bergdahl's return was "so phony" because Bergdahl was a known deserter who was no different than al-Awlaki.

"Al-Awlaki was an American citizen," Boykin said. "He was assassinated by the Obama administration because he was a traitor, he had turned on America. I'm glad he's dead. I have no issue with that. But what's the different between al-Awlaki and Bowe Bergdahl?"

Saying that Bergdahl had already been found guilty of desertion by the military, for which the punishment is death, Boykin declared that "there's no logic" to the swap "except that this was all about closing Guantanamo and they had to have the sequence of events unfold the way they did so they could release these five people out of Guantanamo":

Tony Perkins Falsely Claims The Military Is Instituting Sharia Law

Citing the supposed persecution of Christian service members, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council said today that the Obama administration is imposing Islamic law in the military.

Perkins’ commentary suggests that the military is enforcing Islamic law on service members stationed in Bahrain during Ramadan. But the Stars and Stripes story he cites explains that the military has merely informed American service members about how to stay in compliance with local laws in Bahrain, where the U.S. has a large base, during Ramadan: “While not required to fast during Ramadan, in Bahrain, Americans can be fined or detained by local authorities for eating, drinking or smoking in public when off-base during daylight hours.”

The Navy is, however, requiring conservative long-sleeved shirts and blouses and long pants and skirts to adhere to local customs.

The myth-busting website Snopes has knocked the “greatly exaggerated” claims based on the Stars and Stripes article, noting that service members stationed in Islamic countries have traditionally had to observe local laws during Ramadan, noting that “as with other local laws, they can be detained by authorities for breaking them.”

Thanks to the Obama administration, our military can finally practice a religion: Islam's! Hello, I'm Tony Perkins with the Family Research Council in Washington. While the military is kicking Bibles off of bases and forcing verses to be erased from personal spaces, it seems there is plenty of room for Ramadan. The month-long Muslim holiday kicked off last week, and plenty of troops are celebrating -- whether they want to or not. According to the Stars and Stripes newspaper, the Pentagon is forcing service members to honor the Ramadan rules on everything from clothing to smoking to drinking coffee. During the fast, soldiers were even told they'd be fined for eating or drinking off-base. To most of our troops, who can't even practice their own religion under this administration, this a slap in the face. Our troops are expected to observe the Muslim faith while the expression of their own Christianity is unwelcome in the military fighting for freedom. “Let us redeem the time for certainly the days are evil.”

Tony Perkins Claims 'Liberal Jewish Folk' Are Undermining Israel By Supporting Marriage Equality

In a June address to the Messianic Jewish Alliance of America, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council lamented the support for same-sex marriage and abortion rights among “liberal Jewish folk.”

Perkins cited the rise of gay rights as a sign that American society is abandoning the Bible, warning that the U.S. may next disregard biblical directives to support Israel.

He also pointed to the Presbyterian Church (USA)’s recent decision to allow pastors to officiate same-sex weddings and to divest from three American corporations that are involved in West Bank settlements.

Tony Perkins' Christian-Persecution Report Highlights Persecution of Tony Perkins

The Family Research Council came out yesterday with a report on "hostility to religion in America," a collection of anecdotes from the past 14 years supposedly illustrating the persecution of conservative Christians in the U.S.

Some anecdotes highlighted in the report are troubling incidents that FRC admits were later rectified. Others are incidents that we might not all count as examples of religious hostility — for instance Miss USA contestant Carrie Prejean being “mocked and ridiculed” for her answer to a question on same-sex marriage in 2009. Still others are stories of dubious accuracy — for instance, the story of a girl in Florida supposedly punished for praying at school, who just so happened to be the daughter of the man in charge of promoting Todd Starnes’ book on Christian persecution.

And then there was this:

Minister’s Invitation to National Prayer Luncheon Revoked because of His Comments on Homosexuality in the Military – February 2010*

An ordained minister and Marine Corps veteran was punished for speaking out on a topic unrelated to his planned comments at the National Prayer Luncheon at Andrews Air Force Base outside of Washington, D.C. The minister criticized President Obama’s call to end the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, resulting in his invitation to speak at the National Prayer Luncheon being rescinded. The minister criticized the action as “black-listing” to suppress unwanted viewpoints.

Who is this unnamed minister who was disinvited from the National Prayer Luncheon? He wasn’t just a minister who had criticized “don’t ask, don’t tell” repeal. He was none other than the Family Research Council’s own president Tony Perkins.

This attempt to gloss over Perkins’ identity to make him seem like an innocent bystander to a vast anti-Christian agenda highlights a key strategy in the Religious Right’s persecution narrative. Like David and Jason Benham, who lost a TV contract with HGTV after Right Wing Watch reported on their vocal and public anti-gay, anti-choice activism (and who are also featured in FRC’s report), Tony Perkins is not just a private citizen who holds anti-gay views. He’s the leader of a major organization that opposed the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” with misleading claims and demeaning rhetoric. You can agree or disagree with Perkins being disinvited from the prayer luncheon. But FRC would like us to believe that disagreement with Tony Perkins is the very same thing as hostility to religion.

Tony Perkins Fears Obama Will Start Putting Christians In Jail Any Day Now

Tony Perkins invited Fox News’ go-to-Christian-persecution-commentator Todd Starnes to join him on the weekend edition of “Washington Watch,” where Starnes pointed to recent remarks by Rick Warren and Russell Moore warning of the imminent imprisonment of Christians in America as proof that Christians will indeed soon face jail sentences.

Perkins, who recently warned that gay rights advocates are about to launch an anti-Christian Holocaust, naturally agreed that such arrests are going to “play out very quickly in our day.”

The Family Research Council president told Starnes: “I do think that it could very well come to that in our lifetime. A few years ago I didn’t think it would, not this quickly, but as we have seen the aggressive nature of this administration and this president and the open hostility of this administration toward orthodox faith — we have seen it in the HHS mandate, we have seen it in the numerous cases regarding marriage — I think it is going to come down to that.”

Tony Perkins Says Obama's Push For 'Radical Sexualism' And 'Global Homosexuality' Is Persecuting Christians

Tony Perkins has never been a fan of President Obama’s support for LGBT rights abroad, even going so far as to defend Uganda’s “kill the gays” bill as an “effort to uphold moral conduct."

In his radio bulletin today, the Family Research Council president attacked the Obama administration’s decision to “export immorality” by promoting “global homosexuality” and “radical sexualism.”

He even charged that U.S. support for LGBT rights is somehow harming “Christians persecuted overseas” by undercutting religious freedom.

Under the current administration, America’s top export is immorality. Hello, I'm Tony Perkins with the Family Research Council in Washington. Considering the news, foreign policy must be a foreign concept to this White House. While the veterans watch as the Middle East implodes, the President's trying to put troops on the ground in the fight to promote global homosexuality. When the U.S. embassy isn't flying rainbow flags, the Obama administration is planting them -- for radical sexualism. During this month's LGBT pep rally at the State Department, John Kerry said his biggest focus was "working hard to have lesbian, bisexual, and transgender ambassadors." He went on to say, "We now have hundreds of LGBT individuals in our bureaus at State, USAID, and at posts all around the world." Of course, what Kerry didn't mention is that his agenda is coming at the expense of the nation's real priorities. Unfortunately for Christians persecuted overseas, religious liberty is the casualty of this push. America's credibility is the other.

Perkins: Hobby Lobby Case Was Really About Obama's Effort To Destroy Religious Liberty

Yesterday, Tony Perkins spoke with Steve Malzberg on Newsmax TV about the Supreme Court's ruling in the Hobby Lobby case, which Perkins asserted was not about the issue of contraception coverage at all, but was really an effort by the Obama administration to weaken religious freedom as part of the long-term goal of implementing a "liberal, anti-religious agenda."

This was about breaking "through the firewall," Perkins said, "that has long existed around religious freedom in this country and if they could have forced businesses on this issue, in this manner, there would be nothing stopping them from advancing their liberal, anti-religious agenda."

Predicting that Obama would now double down after the loss at the Supreme Court, Perkins said that conservative Christians must "be vigilant and we've gotta push back" because Obama is going to become even "more aggressive in pushing his agenda" to completely destroy religious liberty in America:

FRC Finds Majority Side With Hobby Lobby If You Lie To Them

In his email to members last night, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins continued to crow about the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision, claiming that “an FRC-commissioned poll [found] that 53% of voters (including 50% of women!) disapproved of the idea that employers' should have to pay for workers' sexual decisions.”

“So if there is a war, it’s on the facts,” he concluded.

Indeed.

As it turns out, the FRC poll that Perkins cites, which was taken in December of last year, got its results by simply lying to respondents about the content of the contraception insurance mandate.

The pollsters asked respondents whether they supported or opposed the "mandate which requires that all private healthcare plans, including both employer based health plans and individual market health plans, cover preventative care services for women, which includes all FDA approved contraceptives, including drugs that can destroy a human embryo, and sterilization services without a direct cost to the patient."

In reality, none of the contraceptives covered under the HHS mandate “destroy a human embryo” — even if Hobby Lobby’s “sincerely held religious beliefs” hold otherwise.

As the Public Religion Research Institute found, when you poll people about the contraception coverage mandate without lying to them, a comfortable majority support it.

Religious Right Reacts To Hobby Lobby Decision: A Victory Over King George III And 'Subsidized Consequence Free Sex'

The Religious Right’s reaction to the Supreme Court’s decision in the Hobby Lobby case — in which the Court’s conservative majority ruled that some for-profit businesses must be exempt from the Affordable Care Act’s contraception coverage mandate — has started rolling in.

Erick Erickson sees the decision as a victory over the promiscuous:

Eric Metaxas thinks King George III would have been on the side of contraceptive insurance:

The Franciscan University of Steubenville compared businesses that don’t want to provide their employees with contraception coverage to religious martyrs in ancient Rome:

Steve Deace called the Green family, which owns the Hobby Lobby chain, "the Rosa Parks of the religious liberty fight" and urged the movement not to "settle" with just the Hobby Lobby victory:

If we play our cards right, and God grants us a favor, we can use this as a momentum changer. That’s mainly thanks to the Green family, who just became the Rosa Parks of the religious liberty fight. Just as her refusal to comply with an unjust edict on a bus one day blew the lid off the civil rights movement, perhaps the Greens’ refusal to comply with Obamacare’s unjust edict can accomplish the same for a similarly worthy cause.

But that won’t happen if we “settle” for this win like we have all too many others.

AFA’s Bryan Fischer thinks he knows Chief Justice John Roberts’ motivation to vote with the Court's majority:

And finally, the American Family Association is taking a poll:

Right Wing Round-Up - 6/27/14

Anti-Gay Activists Call For 'Civil Disobedience' In Wake Of Marriage Equality Rulings

Denunciations of today’s court rulings striking down marriage equality bans in Indiana and Utah are beginning to trickle in from anti-gay activists, with the two cases representing additional defeats for an already struggling movement.

Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council — ignoring the fact that one of the Tenth Circuit Court judges who ruled in favor of marriage equality was recommended by Sen. Jim Inhofe and appointed by George W. Bushblamed the rulings on the Obama administration and leftists who have been “packing the federal courts with liberal jurists” in order to realize “a radical social agenda.”

Perkins also said that he will represent the “indignant Americans who are tired of seeing the foundations of a free and just society destroyed by a handful of black-robed tyrants.”

While disturbing, today's rulings come as no surprise given the rising disdain for the rule of law promoted by the Obama administration. These latest rulings are not just about redefining marriage but they are a further attempt by the courts to untether our public policies from the democratic process, as well as the anthropological record.

While judges can, by judicial fiat, declare same-sex 'marriage' legal, they will never be able to make it right. The courts, for all their power, can't overturn natural law. What they can do is incite a movement of indignant Americans, who are tired of seeing the foundations of a free and just society destroyed by a handful of black-robed tyrants. The Left has long believed packing the federal courts with liberal jurists is the means of fulfilling a radical social agenda, as the American people refuse to endorse that agenda at the polls or through their elected representatives.

As we saw with Roe v. Wade in 1973 – despite the Left's earnest hopes, the courts do not have the final say. The American people will have the final word as they experience the consequences of marriage redefinition and the ways in which it fundamentally alters America's moral, cultural and political landscape.

Jeff Allen, an Indiana-based pastor and senior editor of BarbWire, called for “elected leaders and Christians [to] defiantly rise up and engage in civil disobedience” to stop this “national tragedy” and “the death of democracy.”

“Each victory for the homosexual activists represents another nail in America’s coffin,” he wrote, adding that “these decisions require that reason be jettisoned in favor of unrestrained deviancy.”

Federal courts in Indiana and Utah on Wednesday blatantly overthrew the will of the people and subversively imposed same-sex “marriage” on the citizens of both states. The judicial oligarchy (tyranny of the few) continues flexing the muscle of its apparently unchecked power. The death of democracy is undeniably upon us. Each victory for the homosexual activists represents another nail in America’s coffin.

According to WLFI.com, a ruling from an elitist U.S. District Judge in Indiana wrongly declared that the prohibition was unconstitutional because it violated guarantees of equal protection and due process.



Separately, a rogue appeals court ruled 2-1 that Utah’s traditional marriage amendment was unconstitutional as well, saying that the gender of the two persons cannot be considered as a reason to deny a marriage license. And that’s just it — these decisions require that reason be jettisoned in favor of unrestrained deviancy.



The light of morality and freedom is being brutishly snuffed out right before our very eyes. It’s a national tragedy unfolding at an accelerating pace.

And this is not a good harbinger of things to come — unless our elected leaders and Christians defiantly rise up and engage in civil disobedience.

National Organization for Marriage’s Brian Brown unsurprisingly accused the judges of “activism” and “sophistry.”

Today's split decision of a panel of judges in the 10th Circuit is not surprising given that this Circuit refused to even order a stay of the district court decision when it came down during the Christmas holidays. While we strongly disagree with the two judges in the majority, we are encouraged by the strong defense of marriage articulated by Justice Paul Kelly in his dissent, and especially his defense of the sovereign right of the people of Utah to decide this issue for themselves. This principled recognition by a federal judge considering the marriage issue underscores that the people of a state are entitled to respect and deference in their desire to promote marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Indeed, the US Supreme Court decided in the Windsor case that the federal government must respect the right of states to define marriage. The majority in the Utah case engage in sophistry to attempt to argue their way around the Supreme Court's ruling that it is up to the states to define marriage. As Justice Kelly noted in his dissent, ‘If the States are the laboratories of democracy, requiring every state to recognize same-gender unions—contrary to the views of its electorate and representatives—turns the notion of a limited national government on its head.'



The elected representatives of the people of Indiana have decided, for good and proper reasons, to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. It is judicial activism for a single judge to substitute his own views on marriage for the considered opinion of the people's representatives. This is just the latest example of activism from the federal bench, but we fully expect this decision to eventually be reversed when the US Supreme Court upholds the right of states to define marriage as a man and a woman. In the meantime, it is imperative that the state legislature move forward a state constitutional amendment preserving marriage so that the people always remain in control of the definition of marriage in Indiana.

Congressman Debunks Tony Perkins' Claim That The Obama Administration Refuses To Help Imprisoned Christian In Sudan

Over the past several weeks, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council has relentlessly criticized the Obama administration’s handling of the imprisonment of Meriam Ibrahim, a Sudanese woman who is married to a U.S. citizen. Ibrahim, a Christian, was put on death row in Sudan for apostasy. She was recently released from jail after an appeals court voided her conviction, but according to reports today she has been rearrested while attempting to leave the country.

It is no surprise that Perkins has used the shocking human rights violation as an excuse to attack the Obama administration, but now even his Republican allies aren’t backing him up on it.

Yesterday, when Perkins invited Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., to discuss the case on his radio show “Washington Watch,” Meadows completely undermined the FRC leader’s thinly veiled partisan attacks.

Asked if the State Department was working to help Ibrahim and her children, Meadows reported that the U.S. has in fact worked vigorously behind the scenes to free Ibrahim: “I got off of a call not more than an hour or so ago and a number of agencies across the board are working hand-in-glove to make sure that this is handled quickly and efficiently. And I am heartened by what I heard on that phone call and really encouraged that this is a government that cares about people. Sometimes I wish they would speak up louder and quicker, but I can tell you behind the scenes a number of agencies are working to make sure that they are safe.”

Just minutes later, however, Perkins completely discarded the congressman’s assessment and once again accused the Obama administration of doing little to help secure Ibrahim’s release.

Bizarrely, he cited the case of Abdul Rahman — an Afghan convert to Christianity who faced imprisonment and death threats during the Bush administration — to criticize Obama, saying the president is “not just sympathetic to but I think extremely supportive of these Islamic nations.”

FRC Claims Majority Oppose LGBT Workplace Protections, Cites A Poll That Says The Opposite

The Family Research Council is once again responding to polls showing widespread support for gay rights by making up their own anti-gay fuzzy math.

In his daily email update on Friday, FRC President Tony Perkins wrote that the Republican House leaders who oppose the Employment Non-Discrimination Act are “more in line with the majority of Americans” than is President Obama, who supports the act.

Perkins cited a Huffington Post poll, which he says found that “only 50% of Americans support an ENDA-type” law, which he claims “gives preference to homosexuals and transgenders in the workplace.”

No wonder the President had to resort to an executive order on special treatment for homosexuals. Turns out, the American people aren’t nearly supportive of his agenda as the media led us to believe. In a Huffington Post poll, only 50% of Americans support an ENDA-type (Employment Non-Discrimination Act) law, which gives preference to homosexuals and transgenders in the workplace. Congress had been reluctant to act on ENDA, and now we see that leaders are more in line with the majority of Americans than the President, which jumped ahead of the legislative branch to impose those rules on federal contractors. So much for the groundswell of support for measures that crush the constitutional freedoms of both employers and employees. Most people apparently think the current anti-discrimination statutes are strong enough.

Perkins conveniently leaves out the fact that the Huffington Post poll found that only 38 percent of respondents opposed ENDA, as opposed to 50 percent who supported it. The poll also found that that a vast majority of Americans support the principle of the the law and think that such protections are already in place:

In the new survey, 50 percent of Americans favored and 38 percent opposed legislation banning job discrimination against gays and lesbians. The poll found political division on the issue: 63 percent of Democrats and 52 percent of independents favored that kind of legislation, but only 34 percent of Republicans did.

But on at least one major protection the legislation would provide, all three groups were united. Seventy-six percent of Americans, including 88 percent of Democrats, 74 percent of independents and 68 percent of Republicans, said that it should be illegal to fire someone for being gay or lesbian. Only 12 percent of Americans said it should be legal.

The fact that far more Americans agree with the principle than with the legislation may be attributable to a common misconception: Sixty-two percent of Americans think it's already illegal to fire someone for being gay, while only 14 percent of poll respondents said that it's legal. In fact, it is still legal in 29 states to fire someone for being gay.

Majorities of Democrats, Republicans and independents all think it's already illegal to fire someone for their sexual orientation.

Perkins and Gary Bauer recently claimed that a poll showing opposition to marriage equality among Republicans in fact showed that “most Americans” opposed marriage equality. Perkins made a similar claim about a poll that only surveyed voters in a handful of battleground states and districts.

Family Research Council's Peter Sprigg Confronted By Christian Mother Of Gay Daughter, Recommends She Gets Ex-Gay Therapy

Family Research Council senior fellow Peter Sprigg, who once advocated for the deportation of gay people from the U.S. to stop them from destroying society, fielded a call on the “Washington Watch” radio program yesterday from a listener named Janet, who recounted a heart wrenching story of her daughter coming out as gay.

Janet explained to Sprigg how she still supports her daughter and is sustained by her faith in Jesus Christ.

I want you to understand that I am a Christian, I do believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, but I do have a quandary. I have a daughter who has been married for seven years and she came to me in tears and said, ‘Mother, I can’t live this way, it’s not who I am, I’m gay.’ I was astounded because I didn’t see it, we talked about it, we’ve done everything. My daughter was raised in the church. The thing that we talked about was — I asked, ‘Well why did you marry if you felt this way?’ She said, ‘Because I wanted to be like everybody else.’ I said, ‘Well how long have you know this?’ She said, ‘Mother, I’ve known this since I was a little kid, I’ve always been different from everybody else.’

I’m not turning my back on my daughter, I’m not ashamed of my daughter, I am deeply hurt that there is no church that my daughter can go to and not hear what an awful, sinful, against-God life that she feels that she is. I don’t think that the Jesus I grew up with and learned to love is a resentful or any kind of God that would want to cause pain. I don’t know why my daughter feels the way she does, but she does and she doesn’t lie to me and I know in her heart that this is how she feels. The only thing that I know that I’m supposed to do is to pray for my fellow people in this world, love everybody just as Jesus loves me and I think I have hurt so much because all I hear is what a God-forsaken life they are living. Well God didn’t forsake my daughter, He didn’t.

Sprigg, unsurprisingly, responded to this call by recommending the mother turn to two groups THAT espouse ex-gay therapy: National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) and Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX).

If she does indeed do research on such groups, she will find out that ex-gay therapy has been completely discredited by the mainstream scientific community and has been rejected by many Christian groups, including many former ex-gays.

Robert Gagnon At FRC: Bible Says Gay Sex Worse Than Incest

Earlier this year, Christian author Matthew Vines published a book entitled “God and the Gay Christian: The Biblical Case in Support of Same-Sex Relationships.” Vines’ book so angered Religious Right leaders like Matt Barber that its publisher was pushed out of the National Religious Broadcasters.  The Southern Baptist Convention rushed out an e-book: “God and the Gay Christian? A response to Matthew Vines.”

Today the Family Research Council continued the barrage against the very idea that committed, loving gay relationships might be acceptable in the sight of God.  FRC welcomed anti-gay theologian and activist Robert Gagnon to discuss “Jesus, Scripture, and the Myth of New Knowledge Arguments about Homosexual Unions.”

Gagnon used his hour to dismiss efforts by some scholars and Christians to question traditional interpretations of biblical passages on sexuality – including the ones about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Gagnon is having none of it.

Gagnon insists that examination of Old and New Testament texts makes it clear that only sex in the context of a lifelong marriage between a man and a woman is acceptable to God.  It all goes back to the creation of Eve from part of Adam, resulting in male and female images of God that are sexually incomplete without the other.

Gagnon says Jesus actually had more restrictive views of acceptable sexuality, closing “loopholes” in the Old Testament that, for example, made it easier for men to divorce women.  He extrapolates that because some of the biblical patriarchs engaged in incest, and there’s some polygamy going on, homosexual sex is worse than either of those, the worst sexual sin apart from bestiality.  And it’s no better in the context of a loving relationship.

 

When FRC’s own ardently anti-gay Peter Sprigg asked about the Matthew Vines book, Gagnon dismissed Vines, saying he is young, lacks expertise, and isn’t as significant as other scholars he intends to take on.

Another questioner said it is hard for Christians with gay friends who believe that being gay is their identity, and who aren’t really open to hearing that they must not give in to what Gagnon calls their “innate urges.”  Gagnon responded that Christians may well have to give up those gay friends if they don’t want to hear the truth. Christians who don’t warn their friends to abstain from gay sex, he suggested, and let them go to hell for their sins, will be judged by God for failing to warn them.

 

Tony Perkins Will Have A Lonely Revolution Against Gay Marriage

Operation American Spring. Truckers Ride for the Constitution. Reclaim America Now.

All were right-wing efforts to literally overthrow President Obama. None of them exactly worked.

In 2012, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins similarly warned of an anti-government uprising if the Supreme Court were to strike down bans on same-sex marriage. “I think that could be the straw that broke the camel’s back,” he said, warning that such a ruling would mean “you could have a revolt, a revolution, I think you can see Americans saying ‘enough of this’ and I think it could explode and just break this nation apart.”

In case you thought that was just a one-time gaffe, Perkins maintained a year later that if the government “goes too far” on marriage equality, it would “create revolution” and “literally split this nation in two and create such political and cultural turmoil that I’m not sure we could recover from it.”

That brings us to a poll released today by the Human Rights Campaign and conducted by Alex Lundry, who served as Mitt Romney’s data director in 2012. Respondents to the poll were read Perkins’ “revolution” remarks verbatim. Unsurprisingly, only a tiny handful agreed with him, and even most opponents of marriage equality didn’t buy into his idea of an anti-gay revolution.

Conducting his poll at the beginning of June, Lundry didn’t find much support for that kind of revolt when the quote was read to respondents, with 59 percent overall disagreeing with Perkins. Of people who said they were opposed to gay marriage, 58 percent said they wouldn’t do anything, despite disagreeing and being disappointed in the decision.

“Only one directly mentions the word ‘revolution,’ five voters threaten to leave the country, and a scant fifteen people (3% of opponents) mention any form of protest,” reads a prepared polling memo. “Clearly, there is no real threat of widespread calamity should we extend the freedom to marry to gays and lesbians.”

Support for gay marriage is at 56 percent, with 37 percent opposed, squaring with public polls. Asked to rate the degree of their support, 44 percent said they “strongly” support legalization, with only 28 percent opposed.



Those feelings are reflected in some of the other answers to the survey: 74 percent of people said their lives wouldn’t change with legalized gay marriage, and among those who did foresee a change, many rated it as one that would be for the better.

But we don’t expect Perkins to be deterred. The only poll on the topic that the Family Research Council president appears to believe was sponsored by his organization and only surveyed Republicans and Republican-leaning independents.

Tony Perkins Outraged That Military Color Guard Marched In LGBT Pride Parade

Four years after he lost his unhinged campaign to block the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins is now expressing dismay that the U.S. military color guard marched in the Washington, D.C., LGBT Pride Parade “alongside half-naked people and drag queens.”

Perkins claimed in his radio bulletin today that the color guard’s decision to march discriminates against Christians because uniformed soldiers didn’t participate in the March for Life.

The problem in D.C.'s gay pride parade wasn't that active duty troops were saluting the flag. The problem was which flag they were saluting. Hello, I'm Tony Perkins with the Family Research Council in Washington. March madness isn't just for basketball! After last week's gay pride parade, it applies to the Obama administration too. For the first time ever, the President authorized an eight-member military honor guard to march alongside half-naked people and drag queens. The move, which Capital Pride Parade called "significant," caps off years of being denied by the prestigious soldiers. Making matter worse, this color guard was provided by the U.S. Military District of Washington, which is reserved for the President, Congress, and other state functions. And while the Pentagon may be willing to bend the rules for this cause, you can bet Christian soldiers wouldn't enjoy the same "exemption" if they wore their uniforms to the March for Life. Unfortunately for today's troops -- "equality" is a one-way street, and that street is full of activists.

Dutch Sheets: God Needs An Army To Save America From 'Demonic' Destruction

Today’s “Prophetic Insight” comes via Dutch Sheets, a leader in the dominionist New Apostolic Reformation. It combines the kind of religious persecution rhetoric examined in PFAW’s recent report, “Persecution Complex,”with a triumphant assertion that God will destroy the people standing in the way of establishing God’s kingdom in America.

Back in 2012, Sheets gave the keynote at a conference organized by fellow prophet Cindy Jacobs with an assist from the Family Research Council.  Sheets mocked churchgoers who focused on things like pastoral care, saying he was looking for “warriors” who would assume their responsibility to legislate, govern, and manage the earth in partnership with God.

Sheets’ new prophetic word is that “God is not done with America,” in spite of a “demonic tide of destruction” that has been “unleashed upon our nation.” Sheets bemoans, “Politically, economically and humanistically, there is an agenda to make this nation never again look the way it has looked before.” He returns to his theme that Americans are not doing enough to build the kingdom of God on earth:

After making great advances in kingdom building, many have let discouragement and fear gain a foothold in their hearts. They've laid down their tools and folded their hands. Others are busy with good kingdom works, but don't dare challenge the status quo, much less, the systems aimed at shredding the moral fabric of our nation, destroying the institution of the family and stripping us of our religious freedoms.

As in the days of Ezra, "wicked counselors," known today as lobbyists, are diligently and strategically opposing God's people to advance the antichrist agenda in every sector of society. This is a fulfillment of the first few verses of Psalms 2, which describe those who hate God and take counsel together, devising plans to contend against Him and His people. These counselors think they've overthrown God's rule and conquered His people and, in their arrogance, openly decree this.

Sheets wraps himself in the kind of martyrdom rhetoric that is seemingly irresistible to Religious Right leaders:

Fellow warriors, we cannot fear that if we resist the government and the political activists, we might be taken out. Neither can we fear that we might go to jail, lose our government funding or tax-exempt status, or have our business shut down for speaking the truth or refusing to marry same-sex couples. Yes, these things are already happening—some are already paying a high price to stand for righteousness—but we cannot cower and live in a paralyzing fear. We must only move in the fear of the Lord.

But don’t worry, he says. God will laugh at those wicked counselors and then destroy them: “Lastly, God takes His rod and begins to break and shatter kingdoms in order to reestablish His reign in the earth. The good news is clearly laid out here—in the end, we win!”

Sheets tells a Bible story about prophets Haggai and Zechariah who worked with God’s government (Joshua the priest) and civil government (Zerubbabel the governor) to lead a reformation. Sheets clearly wants to play the part of prophet in the modern version of the story.

Zechariah later prophesied to Zerubbabel saying, this mountain in front of you is going to be brought low and become a plain. Not by might or power but by my Spirit, you will tear it down with shouts of grace, grace! This is a picture of what God wants to do in America!

God just needs warriors.

It is OK to grieve, like Jeremiah or Nehemiah, over the condition of our nation, but we must not give in to discouragement and fear. God is calling forth an army of faithful followers who will come up out of their discouragement to boldly push back the darkness.

Many leaders in government, health, education and ministry are having to make a decision right now—am I going to make my stand or am I going to compromise and yield to the enemy's plans? I, for one, say what America's founding fathers said upon signing the Declaration of Independence and, thereby, committing an act of treason against the crown: I pledge my life, my fortune, my sacred honor—everything to stop this insidious plan of hell. Will you join me?

Richard Land And Jerry Boykin Claim Obama Is God's Judgment On America

On yesterday’s “Washington Watch,” Religious Right leaders Jerry Boykin and Richard Land agreed that President Obama is — in Land’s words — “a judgment of God on the United States.”

Land, a former Southern Baptist Convention official, blamed Obama for the current conflict in Iraq, saying that he lost the Iraq fight just as Americans abandoned the South Vietnamese.

Later in the program, Land reassured a listener who asked if impeaching the president “would start a race war.” Land responded that it wouldn’t because African Americans would realize as a result of the impeachment process that Obama “was doing things that were illegal” and so “ it would not break out into any sustained episodes of violence.”

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious