Family Research Council

Boykin: When Jesus Comes Back, He'll Be Carrying An AR-15 Assault Rifle

Last fall, the Family Research Council's Jerry Boykin spoke at the WallBuilders' Pro-Family Legislators Conference where he declared that when Jesus comes back, he'll do so carrying an AR-15 assault rifle.

As Boykin explained once before, Jesus was a tough guy and real "man's man," and that is because he is a warrior who will come back covered in the blood of his enemies and carrying an assault rifle ... which is why every Bible believing Christian must own one as well:

The Lord is a warrior and in Revelation 19 is says when he comes back, he's coming back as what? A warrior. A might warrior leading a mighty army, riding a white horse with a blood-stained white robe ... I believe that blood on that robe is the blood of his enemies 'cause he's coming back as a warrior carrying a sword. 

And I believe now - I've checked this out - I believe that sword he'll be carrying when he comes back is an AR-15.

Now I want you to think about this: where did the Second Amendment come from? ... From the Founding Fathers, it's in the Constitution. Well, yeah, I know that. But where did the whole concept come from? It came from Jesus when he said to his disciples 'now, if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.'

I know, everybody says that was a metaphor.  IT WAS NOT A METAPHOR! He was saying in building my kingdom, you're going to have to fight at times. You won't build my kingdom with a sword, but you're going to have to defend yourself.  And that was the beginning of the Second Amendment, that's where the whole thing came from. I can't prove that historically and David [Barton] will counsel me when this is over, but I know that's where it came from.

And the sword today is an AR-15, so if you don't have one, go get one. You're supposed to have one. It's biblical.

Boykin Blames Obama For PTSD And Sexual Assault In Military

Family Research Council vice president Jerry Boykin yesterday blamed President Obama for the high rate of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and sexual assaults among military service members.

Speaking with FRC president Tony Perkins on Washington Watch about an Associated Press story on the increasing number of military officers leaving the Army due to misconduct charges, Boykin said that Obama and his “radical agenda” are responsible for the problems in the military.

Boykin claimed that leaders of “true American values” are “electing to leave the military” because the Obama administration “has proceeded down the path of social engineering in our military and forced its very radical agenda on our military" and now people with “questionable backgrounds and character” are taking their place, contributing to growing rates of “sexual assault and fraud and all kinds of things.”

He added that Obama is bringing “lawlessness” into the military.

Boykin even linked Obama to PTSD cases: “One of the reasons I think we see so much PTSD today is because of this lawlessness, it’s because of the declining moral climate and troops are in a situation where they actually don’t know what the standards are — moral standards, value standards — they don’t know what they are because they don’t see it at the highest levels, all the way up to the Commander-in-Chief, and as a result of that I think from time to time they do bad things that they live with the rest of their life.”

Perkins: Promoting Ex-Gay Therapy Like Saving Someone From A Burning Building

Family Research Council head Tony Perkins is upset about new state efforts to bar the use of “ex-gay” therapy on minors, which he says are no different from laws banning someone from helping a person out of a burning building.

“If people want to engage in behavior that is destructive, personally, I want to warn them about it, I don’t want to be silenced from the ability of saying ,‘Hey, your house is on fire, you might want to come out,’” Perkins said. “Of course you’re saying that’s absurd, who would ever pass a law saying you can’t say ‘your house is on fire’?”

“Well, more and more states are actually moving to make it illegal for children under eighteen to receive counseling to come out of homosexuality.”

Perkins lamented that such laws “silence” parents who want to “help” their child “come out of a lifestyle we know is destructive and harmful.”

Religious Right Leaders Rail Against Virginia Marriage Equality Decision

A federal judge’s decision to strike down Virginia’s ban on same-sex marriagehas unsurprisingly stoked the ire of conservatives.

Family Research Council head Tony Perkins offered a typical rebuke of “activist judges” and the “arrogant judiciary,” and once again warned that marriage equality will in fact lead to unprecedented inequality.

It appears that we have yet another example of an arrogant judge substituting her personal preferences for the judgment of the General Assembly and 57 percent of Virginia voters. Our nation's judicial system has been infected by activist judges, which threaten the stability of our nation and the rule of law.

This ruling comes on the heels of Attorney General Mark Herring's refusal to fulfill his constitutional duty to defend the state's marriage law. His lawlessness is an insult to the voters of Virginia who rightfully expected elected officials to uphold the laws and constitution of the state, not attack them as Herring has done.

An arrogant judiciary is only one of the major consequences of the drive to redefine marriage. Increasingly, Americans are being forced to finance and celebrate unions that not only step on free speech and religious liberty but also deny children a mom and a dad. Rather than live-and-let-live, this court by redefining marriage will create a level of inequality that has never been seen in our country as people are forced to suppress or violate the basic teachings of their faith," concluded Perkins.

Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel and Liberty University Law School, which is based in Virginia, said the judge must not have ever read the Constitution.

“This decision is outrageous and legally flawed. Judges would be well-served to read the U.S. Constitution and not invent or rewrite it,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel. “The Constitution cannot be changed by the stroke of a judge’s pen, nor does it bow to a judge’s personal ideology. The overwhelming majority of Virginia voters who make up ‘we the people’ voted to affirm natural marriage. Same-sex marriage, as a policy matter, sends the message that children do not need moms and dads. There is ample evidence that children fair [sic] best when raised with a mother and a father. Same-sex marriage is not the equivalent of natural marriage. Judges should be careful to render decisions grounded in the Constitution and the rule of law. Otherwise, judges and courts will render themselves impotent when the people lose confidence in the judicial system,” Staver continued.

The Family Foundation of Virginia, meanwhile, blamed Valentine’s Day for the ruling, which the group says threatens “our entire social fabric.”

“The timing of this decision certainly calls into question Judge Wright Allen’s objectivity,” a Friday morning statement from the group stated. “This rushed release just prior to Valentine’s Day reeks of political show, making her ruling less a legal argument and more a press release. It’s disappointing that a federal judge would so blatantly expose her personal political agenda at the expense of not just marriage, but our entire social fabric.”



“Regardless of one’s stance on marriage, the people of Virginia were disenfranchised by this ruling as our voice and our vote that amended our Constitution have been rendered meaningless by a single federal judge with the assistance of our own Attorney General,” the Family Foundation statement read. “Protecting a timeless institution for the well-being of children was the will of the overwhelming majority of Virginians and this ruling denies this important state interest as it places the desires of adults over the outcomes of children.”

National Organization for Marriage president Brian Brown said the “terrible decision” must be reversed:

This is another example of an Obama-appointed judge twisting the constitution and the rule of law to impose her own views of marriage in defiance of the people of Virginia. There is no right to same-sex 'marriage' in the United States constitution. In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court has said that states have the preeminent duty of defining marriage. The people of Virginia did just that in voting overwhelmingly to affirm marriage as the union of one man and woman. That decision should be respected by federal judges and we hope that the U.S. Supreme Court ends up reversing this terrible decision. This case also leaves a particular stench because of the unconscionable decision of Attorney General Mark Herring to not only abandon his sworn duty to defend the laws of the state, but to actually join the case against the very people he is duty-bound to represent.

Judson Phillips of Tea Party Nation blasted the “imperious federal judiciary” and the “liberal state apparatus,” warning that they are trying “to advance a social experiment that changes America from the nation that we know into something totally unrecognizable” and “will force you to support homosexual marriage.”

The case, if it can be appealed must be appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The problem is that appellate courts have to rule based on the record from the trial court. The record is the transcript of witnesses’ testimony and other evidence the trial judge heard.

With Virginia’s Attorney General refusing to defend the case, the case might not even be appealed and even if it is, the record may be very limited.

Once again, we see an imperious federal judiciary overruling the voters of a state to advance a social experiment that changes America from the nation that we know into something totally unrecognizable.

And with the striking down of this law, can the liberal state apparatus be far behind? That liberal state apparatus is the one that will force you to support homosexual marriage whether or not it conflicts with your religious beliefs.

Cruz: 'Our Heart Weeps' Due To Marriage Equality Gains

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz joined Family Research Council president Tony Perkins on Washington Watch yesterday to discuss his proposed State Marriage Defense Act, which as we explained earlier would “make it more difficult for married same-sex couples to receive legal recognition.”

Cruz said that the Obama administration’s support for LGBT equality represents an “abuse of power and lawlessness” and chided gay rights advocates for their “litigation approach.”

“Our heart weeps for the damage to traditional marriage that has been done,” Cruz said, warning that marriage is “under attack.”

“We need to stand up and defend traditional marriage and especially do everything we can to prevent the federal government from forcing a different definition of marriage that is contrary to the views to the citizens of each state.”

The Texas senator also agreed with Perkins’ assessment that and Obama administration officials want to “move quick[ly]” on marriage equality “because there will be pushback from the country when people see the consequences of this redefinition of marriage; they are trying to lock this in quickly hoping that it cannot be reversed.”

FRC Preposterously Blames 'Left-Wing Extremists' For Most 'Incidents Of Domestic Terrorism In This Country'

Tony Perkins and Ken Blackwell of the Family Research Council are attacking the Obama administration over a Ohio National Guard training drill last month that simulated a threat from “two school employees who are disgruntled over the government’s interpretation of the Second Amendment.”

News of the drill started circulating in conservative media this week, feeding anti-Obama paranoia (even though last year’s drill simulated a threat from a radical environmentalists).

On yesterday’s edition of Washington Watch, Blackwell and Perkins said that the drill must have been the idea of the federal government, and argued that there is no reason at all to fear any danger from right-wing extremists. “When you look back at incidents of domestic terrorism in this country, it’s not done by right-wing, conservative people or organizations, it’s done by left-wing extremists,” Perkins said. Blackwell concurred: “Absolutely, that’s been the factual history of domestic terrorist attacks and efforts.”

That is completely false, of course.

The nonpartisan New America Foundation found that the pool of “‘non-jihadist’ terrorists” is “overwhelmingly made up of right-wing extremists.” The Director of Terrorism Studies at the West Point-based Combatting Terrorism Center found attacks by right-wing extremists up “more than 400%” since 2000.

John Tirman of the MIT Center for International Studies notes that in “the START database on terrorism in America,” from “1990 to 2009, START identified 275 ‘homicide events’ that killed 520 people and were committed by right-wing ideologues. There were many more incidents of destruction of property, nonfatal attacks, and other acts of thuggery by white supremacists, private militias, and the like.”

“Fifty-six percent of domestic terrorist attacks and plots in the U.S. since 1995 have been perpetrated by right-wing extremists, as compared to 30 percent by ecoterrorists and 12 percent by Islamic extremists,” writes Ken Sofer. “Right-wing extremism has been responsible for the greatest number of terrorist incidents in the U.S. in 13 of the 17 years since the Oklahoma City bombing.”

Since Perkins and Blackwell were already just making things up, why not one more? The two FRC leaders proceeded to accuse the Southern Poverty Law Center of being listed on “the domestic terrorism list. ”

“It’s not conservatives,” Perkins said. “If it were conservatives who were doing that kind of stuff we would never hear the end of it.”

Perkins: Same-Sex Marriage 'Will Create A Level Of Inequality That Has Never Been Seen In Our Country'

The anti-gay Family Research Council is unsurprisingly dismayed by a federal court ruling that will require Kentucky to recognize same-sex marriages performed in states where such unions are legal.

FRC president Tony Perkins said in a press release today the decision represents a “deep betrayal of the judicial system infected with activist judges who are legislating from the bench” and threatens the freedom of speech.

Perkins even said that marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples “will create a level of inequality that has never been seen in our country as people are forced to suppress or violate the basic teachings of their faith.”

That’s right, Perkins seems to think that legalizing same-sex marriage will produce more “inequality” than slavery, Jim Crow, the subjugation of women and any other injustice in American history.

This ruling is another example of the deep betrayal of a judicial system infected with activist judges who are legislating from the bench. If these judges want to change duly enacted laws passed by the people and their representatives, they should resign their life-time appointments to the bench and run for the state legislature or Congress. Judge Heyburn is elevating his own ideology over that of three-quarters of Kentucky voters who voted to preserve marriage in their constitution as it has always been defined.

This ruling comes at a time when the consequences of marriage redefinition are mounting. Increasingly, Americans are being forced to finance and celebrate unions that not only step on free speech and religious liberty but also deny children a mom and a dad. Rather than live-and-let-live, this court by redefining marriage will create a level of inequality that has never been seen in our country as people are forced to suppress or violate the basic teachings of their faith.

Perkins: Gay Marriage Turns Kids Gay, Hurts US In Global Economic Competition

On Friday’s edition of Washington Watch, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins got into a debate with a caller over marriage equality, during which Perkins said that gay marriage will turn children into gay, super-sexualized beings who won’t be able to compete in the global economy. Instead of offering credible answers to the caller’s questions, Perkins brushed them aside and repeatedly moved on to his next dubious argument against same-sex marriage.

The debate started when the caller contested Perkins’ use of the term “natural marriage,” since the definition of marriage has changed throughout history and has included relationships such as polygamy.

Perkins responded that it doesn’t matter that polygamy has been considered “natural” throughout different cultures and history “because same-sex marriage has never existed for the last ten years at best,” and then switched gears to claim that same-sex marriage will jeopardize the country’s prospects “on giving birth to the next generation.”

When the caller replied that people don’t choose to be gay and therefore marriage equality won’t impact America’s fertility rate, Perkins argued that the debate isn’t really about marriage but rather public school classes that teach “kids how to engage in homosexual behavior”…which he said will turn kids gay and harm America’s economic competitiveness with other nations.

Perkins’ jarring arguments aren’t anything new. He has claimed that same-sex relationships are part of a government “population control” plot, and leads an organization that wants to “export” gay people from the US “because we believe homosexuality is destructive to society.”

Perkins: There’s actually more of a historical basis for polygamy than there’s ever been for same-sex marriage because same-sex marriage has never existed for the last ten years at best.

Caller: Well it is a new thing I’ll grant you that, I understand that the phrasing ‘natural marriage’ is great, it fits really great on a bumper sticker, but I just don’t think it means anything and I’m trying to understand what that’s supposed to mean.

Perkins: How do you plan on giving birth to the next generation?

Caller: That’s the thing, how many same-sex marriages are there out there? What is it, 2 percent, 3 percent of the total number of marriages? I don’t think that we’re going to have to worry about the next generation.

Perkins: But if it’s normative and it’s normal then we would say we would want more of it if it’s beneficial.

Caller: Well no, I don’t think that’s it at all. People don’t suddenly one day decide to become gay, you’re either gay or you’re not. I’ve never met anyone who just scratched their head and went, ‘you know what I think I’m into guys now’ or ‘I think I’m into girls now,’ it just doesn’t happen.

Perkins: …Okay. What does that have to do with marriage? What does that have to do with redefining marriage, redefining the curriculum in our schools?

Caller: Well you’re saying that we have to worry about the next generation, I’m saying that there is a very small portion of the population, probably less than 10 percent, that are gay. I think that the next generation is going to come along whether we want it to or not, it’s not about—

Perkins: No, because what happens when you change and you say heterosexual marriage is the same as homosexual marriage, then you change the curriculum in your schools and you have kids, as a natural part of growing up and developing, they’re curious and they don’t know, and we’re exposing them to even more sexuality and overt sexual messages and we’re telling them, ‘hey experiment.’ And that is what leads, in many cases, to children going down a particular path, is early childhood sexual exposure, sometimes it’s traumatic. And by normalizing that and mainstreaming that, what you will do is you will have more children going down that path and that’s why they want to get this message into our schools.

Caller: I understand your argument but is there any data to support that?

Perkins: What do you mean any data to support it?

Caller: You are saying if you expose children to homosexuality you will have more homosexuals.

Perkins: Well if you sexualize a culture — I can tell you the data is very clear on what’s happened in the last 30 to 40 years where we have inundated young people, children, with sexual messages and they become sexually active. So when you take and mix into that homosexuality and other forms of sexuality into that, yes they are going to move down that path, they are going to engage in what you tell them about. That is why it’s problematic, that is why parents are upset about what is happening in Hawaii and other states that are teaching their kids how to engage in homosexual behavior, or heterosexual for that matter. I don’t want my kids that are 11, 12 and 13 years-old taught how to put on a condom or taught about how to engage in sexual behavior with someone who has HIV in a safe fashion. That is not what the schools should be about. They should be about teaching our kids to read, to write, to engage in science. How do we ever expect to compete globally when we’re fixated on teaching our kids about sex?

Nunnelee Claims Obama Banned Military Service Members From Donating To Churches

Religious Right activists are trying very hard to make the case — with very little evidence — that the Obama administration is cracking down on Christians in the U.S. military.

Over the past couple of years, Rep. Alan Nunnelee (R-MS) has enthusiastically gotten in on the game in order to stir baseless fears of anti-Christian persecution under President Obama.

Speaking with Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council on Washington Watch earlier this week, the congressman made the absurd accusation that the Obama administration is threatening service members who make donations to their churches.

After Perkins accused Obama of trying to “suppress” religious freedom in order to advance his “radical social policy,” Nunnelee said, “We have military people — ‘If you are supporting an evangelical Christian organization’ — I take that to be my church — ‘then you are subject to Uniform Code of Military Justice.’ Well that is frightening. If a soldier — a man or woman in the military—makes a contribution to their church and they’re going to be hauled in before the UCMJ, that is very serious.”

Right Boycotting Girl Scout Cookies Over Yoga, Climate Change, 'Lesbian Role Models'

It’s that time of year again: Girl Scout cookie boycott season!

WorldNetDaily today reports on the right-wing organizations that are boycotting the Girl Scouts for such offenses as tweeting a HuffPost Live video in which someone mentioned Wendy Davis, promoting “ardent feminist” writers, marching in a gay pride parade, and incorporating “labyrinths, global warming, yoga, avatars, smudging incense, Zen gardens and lesbian role models into their teachings.”

WND has reported on a variety of activities on the part of Girl Scouts that conservatives and religious believers might find objectionable, including when the organization was found touting a pro-abortion politician.

Girl Scouts also marched in a homosexual promotion in San Francisco and were found to be removing “God” from their “Girl Scout Promise.”

They also have incorporated stone labyrinths, global warming, yoga, avatars, smudging incense, Zen gardens and lesbian role models into their teachings.

In a lesson called “Amaze: The Twists and Turns of Getting Along,” girls were taught that they should read Buddha and explore mazes and stone or dirt labyrinths – symbols rooted in pagan mythology and popular within the New Age movement as meditation tools.

They also were introduced to Polish poet Anna Swir, known for her feminist and erotic poems, and Jane Addams, an ardent feminist and pacifist.

The American Family Association sent an email to its members last week urging them to “just say, ‘No, thank you” when a girl scout comes to their door selling cookies. “It’s hard to say no to those little girls in the green and brown sashes,” writes AFA president Tim Wildmon, “but buying Girl Scout cookies serves only to further facilitate a very liberal pro-abortion agenda.”

The Family Research Council has also urged its members to boycott the cookies.

Concerned Women for America has also come out against the Girl Scouts. CWA’s Janice Shaw Crouse told WorldNetDaily, “The Girl Scouts formerly embraced the Judeo-Christian values that Americans once grew up with – love of God, love of country, treating others fairly and living wholesome lives. Now, Girl Scouts are more focused on indoctrinating girls on the so-called women’s rights agenda.”

Tony Perkins Rails Against Disney For Including Same-Sex Couple On 'Good Luck Charlie'

Family Research Council head Tony Perkins is joining other anti-gay activists in blasting the Disney Channel show “Good Luck Charlie” for daring to include a same-sex couple in one episode. “Good Luck Charlie” came under fire from One Million Moms, a wing of the American Family Association, which warned members that Disney will “corrupt the children’s network with LGBT content.”

Perkins declared victory over Disney, insisting without any evidence that “One Million Moms is flooding the channel with complaints.”

The FRC leader even made the baseless claim that “research says” same-sex parenting is harmful to kids.

He adds: “So it’s a little ironic that the show's called, ‘Good luck, Charlie.’ Without a dad, he'll need it.”

Perkins seems to have been so blinded by outrage in watching the show that he missed the fact that it is Charlie’s friend, and not Charlie herself, who has same-sex parents. And that Charlie is a girl.

When liberals took over the Disney Channel, they were hoping for a happy ending for their agenda. What they're getting is anything but. Hello, I'm Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C. If you're looking for conservative values at Disney, it really is a small world after all. Producers made that clear when they introduced the channel's first same-sex couple to kids. After a year of planning, Disney finally made good on its promise, using the show "Good Luck Charlie" to give Taylor two moms. A spokesman says the show "was developed under the [advice] of child development experts..." But if Disney thinks that'll fly with parents, they've spent too much time in Fantasyland. OneMillionMoms is flooding the channel with complaints. Like us, they know what the research says: which is that kids who are deprived of a mom or dad grow up with significantly more emotional and academic problems. So it's a little ironic that the show's called, "Good luck, Charlie." Without a dad, he'll need it.

Right Wing Leftovers - 1/30/14

  • The Southern Baptist Convention's ERLC will host a conference on "the gospel and human sexuality to equip pastors and church leaders to speak to these critical issues in their own congregations" that is going to feature Mark Regnerus.
  • Miley Cyrus, Justin Bieber, and Katy Perry are in need of prayer.
  • The Apostolic Council of Prophetic Elders is out with its long run-down of incredibly vague predictions about what the world will experience in 2014.
  • FRC prays against the legalization of marijuana: "May the American people come to their senses to reject this trend and reverse it!"
  • Finally, Gary Cass delivers a "Spiritual State of the Union" address; it is not good: "[A] small but militant minority is hell bent on destroying all vestiges of our Christian heritage. Marxist / Secularists have prosecuted their 100 year Cultural Jihad to infiltrate the media, education and politics, especially the courts, and impose their secular fundamentalism. The election and re-election of Barack Obama is sobering proof of their formidable influence."

FRC Agrees Anti-Gay Activists Are Just Like Dred Scott

Whenever you hear about a member of the Virginia House of Delegates saying something ridiculously offensive or introducing a radical anti-gay or anti-choice law, there’s a pretty good bet that that delegate is Bob Marshall. 

So it was this week when Marshall attacked state Attorney General Mark Herring for refusing to defend Virginia’s same-sex marriage ban in court by comparing himself and fellow anti-gay activists to Dred Scott. While we weren’t surprised to hear Marshall making an over-the-top statement comparing himself to an enslaved person denied citizenship because of his race, we weren’t necessarily expecting the Family Research Council to trumpet their “good friend” Marshall’s remarks. But then we got this email from the FRC touting “The Marshall Plan…on Marriage”:

Days after announcing his refusal to carry out his most basic duty -- upholding the state constitution's marriage amendment -- Herring is facing more than criticism. Thanks to Virginia Delegate Bob Marshall (R), he may also be staring down some weighty repercussions. This week, Del. Marshall, a good friend to FRC, filed a complaint with the Virginia State Bar over Herring's refusal to enforce the will of 57% of the people. "Herring has put all of us in the position of Dred Scott, who had no right to counsel in federal court. An attorney general has a duty to support those laws that are constitutional, and an attorney general has just as strong an obligation and duty to defend laws that he has concluded are unconstitutional..."

Marshall is the “good friend” of FRC who once said that children with disabilities are God’s punishment for abortion, reacted to the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, by lamenting that “it's a distraction when I'm on the battlefield and have to concentrate on the enemy 600 yards away and I'm worried about this guy whose got eyes on me,” and led the effort to defeat the nomination of an openly gay judge, questioning how he would rule in a "bar room fight between a homosexual and heterosexual."

FRC Distorts Harvard Study To Claim Gay Marriage Harms Children

Surprising no one, the Family Research Council is attempting to spin a new Harvard study which found that “children raised in communities with high percentages of single mothers are significantly less likely to experience absolute and relative mobility” as a reason to oppose marriage equality. FRC president Tony Perkins and senior fellow Peter Sprigg addressed the Harvard findings on Monday’s edition of Washington Watch during a discussion of a proposed anti-gay amendment in Indiana.

After Sprigg noted that “if a child grows up in a community with married households, that child will do better than a child raised in a community where there are many single parent households,” he said that the study affirmed his opposition to marriage equality: “This is exactly what I’ve been saying about the marriage issue, if you redefine marriage it’s not going to affect just those couples, it’s going to affect the whole community by setting an example.”

“That study then answers that question: how does my same-sex marriage affect yours?” Perkins added. “Well, it may not affect my marriage but it affects my children because it has an impact upon marriage across the board.”

Essentially, Perkins and Sprigg are arguing that by banning gay couples from getting married, they will somehow reduce the number of single parent households.

Don’t worry if that argument makes no sense to you, because it shouldn’t: it relies on an oft-repeated but discredited claim that the legalization of same-sex marriage makes it less likely for opposite-sex couples to get married.

U.S. District Court Judge Robert J. Shelby found [PDF] that Utah couldn’t provide any evidence to support its claim that banning same-sex marriage was necessary to curb a negative impact on opposite-sex marriage:

The State has presented no evidence that the number of opposite-sex couples choosing to marry each other is likely to be affected in any way by the ability of same-sex couples to marry. Indeed, it defies reason to conclude that allowing same-sex couples to marry will diminish the example that married opposite-sex couples set for their unmarried counterparts. Both opposite-sex and same-sex couples model the formation of committed, exclusive relationships, and both establish families based on mutual love and support. If there is any connection between same-sex marriage and responsible procreation, the relationship is likely to be the opposite of what the State suggests. Because Amendment 3 does not currently permit same-sex couples to engage in sexual activity within a marriage, the State reinforces a norm that sexual activity may take place outside the marriage relationship.

Wildmon: Gay Rights Advocates 'Force Feeding The American Public'

American Family Association president Tim Wildmon yesterday joined other anti-gay pundits in criticizing the Grammy Awards for a performance that included a wedding service for both same-sex and opposite-sex couples, which Wildmon said shows that liberals are “force feeding the American public” with homosexuality.

“Hollywood, the entertainment industry and the political left just can’t get enough ‘gay,’” Wildmon said.

He also attacked President Obama for inviting openly gay NBA player Jason Collins to the State of the Union address: “President Obama now has invited an NBA player to sit in the gallery for the State of the Union speech precisely because he has sex with other men and is proud of it. These people don’t just want acceptance, they want middle America’s approval.”

Tim Graham of the Media Research Center accused the Grammys of trying to “flush the Bible on national TV,” while Family Research Council senior fellow Peter Sprigg said the award show has been “shamelessly exploited in support of a radical social and political agenda.”

“Hollywood, the entertainment industry and the political left just can’t get enough ‘gay,’” American Family Association president Tim Wildmon told LifeSiteNews. “They are force feeding the American public. We have ‘Kinky Boots’ which are cross-dressers in the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day parade, we got a homosexual wedding float in the Rose Bowl Parade and now we are pushing ‘gay marriage’ during the Grammy Awards. President Obama now has invited an NBA player to sit in the gallery for the State of the Union speech precisely because he has sex with other men and is proud of it. These people don’t just want acceptance, they want middle America’s approval.”

“It is unfortunate that CBS and the Grammys would allow an entertainment awards show to be so shamelessly exploited in support of a radical social and political agenda,” Peter Sprigg, Senior Fellow for Policy Studies at the Family Research Council, told LifeSiteNews. “It’s ironic that these ceremonies accompanied a song, ‘Same Love.’ The government has no legitimate interest in ‘love’ alone, but it does have an interest in encouraging procreation and mother-father households.”

The on-air same-sex “weddings” were the brainchild of Grammy producer Ken Ehrlich, who told theNew York Times he got the idea from his lesbian daughter, who told him that Macklemore and Lewis sometimes allow couples to propose marriage onstage during concert performances of “Same Love.” Ehrlich said he suggested the duo “[take] it a step further with a full wedding.”

But Ehrlich denied that it was just a stunt. “We’re serious about this,” he told the Times. He added that while he personally believes marriage should be redefined to include same-sex couples, “I would not want to make a broad statement that it represents the views of the [National] Academy [of Recording Arts and Sciences] or the CBS television network.”

But Tim Graham, director of media analysis for the conservative Media Research Center, strongly disagreed.

“They can say this is not a stunt, but that's exactly what it is, a piece of musical agitprop to mock the traditional values of conservative American Christians, Jews, Muslims, and others,” Graham wrote on the NewsBusters blog. “Entertainers never want to have a debate, just a series of arrogant ‘statements’ with no opportunity for a conversation as they flush the Bible on national TV.”

Right Wing Round-Up - 1/27/14

Right Wing Leftovers - 1/23/14

  • NOM is calling for "the impeachment of Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring for 'malfeasance' and 'neglect of duty' and violating his sworn oath of office to support the constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia" for not defending the state's anti-gay marriage amendment.
  • Peter LaBarbera continues his crusade against Fox News for being too "pro-gay."
  • You really have to feel for the people on Glenn Beck's staff who have to sit there and listen as he goes off on a rant about who knows what.
  • Jerry Newcombe is outraged by Lifetime's remake of "Flowers In The Attic."
  • Finally, FRC continues to pray against Obamacare: "May Americans dazzled by the false promise of lower cost or free healthcare realize that they have bought into a lie that will result in increased, taxpayer-funded abortion, but also substandard healthcare, greater cost, reduced innovation, diminished care for the elderly, fewer doctors to serve more people, longer waits for care and very soon, rationing, etc."

FRC Blames Obama, Liberals For College Sexual Assaults

In his latest Washington Update email, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins criticizes President Obama’s push to combat sexual assaults on college campuses, saying that Obama’s “own views have helped create” the sexual assault epidemic.

Perkins writes that what is to blame for sexual assaults on campus is that “America's kids are growing up in an oversexualized culture, fed in part by Hollywood -- but also by the radical Left.” He cites the Affordable Care Act’s contraception coverage mandate, President Obama’s admission that he smoked marijuana when he was young, and an off-hand remark the president once made suggesting that a bartender could hold a happy hour to convince her friends to sign up for health insurance.

Perkins previously blamed the rise in sexual assaults in the military on the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.

While the pro-life movement protested the violence against the unborn and women, President Obama focused on a different kind of assault. Turning a blind eye to the marchers outside, the White House tried to change the subject from abortion to college sexual assault. Insisting that the country doesn't pay enough attention to the problem, the President signed a special memorandum today, creating a task force to combat an epidemic that his own views have helped create! In the report from his White House Council on Women and Girls, the administration insists that the incidence of rape "is highest at college, fueled by drinking and drug use that can incapacitate victims."

But instead of putting the blame for this very real crisis where it belongs, the White House points the finger at "police bias" and a "lack of training to investigate and prosecute sex crimes." With all due respect, the people who need training are the leaders who head up this council. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand what's really driving the sexual abuse on college campuses. (And it isn't the failure local law enforcement).

Abuse is never okay. But America's kids are growing up in an oversexualized culture, fed in part by Hollywood -- but also by the radical Left. In the debate over contraception, it wasn't the police department that embraced the hook-up culture and crusaded for free birth control . It wasn't the police department that urged more than 50 universities to open their campuses to co-ed dorm rooms. It wasn't the police who blamed sexual assault on drinking and drug use -- and then proceeded to encourage ObamaCare Happy Hours and even endorse the decriminalization of marijuana. "I smoked pot as a kid," the President told reporters last weekend, "and I view it as a bad habit and a vice, not very different from the cigarettes that I smoked as a young person up through a big chunk of my adult life. I don't think it is more dangerous than alcohol."

Then, to top it all off, the President appoints his three most controversial Cabinet members to head up the new anti-assault initiative: Attorney General Eric Holder (Mr. Lawlessness himself), Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel (whose military has its own sexual abuse problems), and Education Secretary Arne Duncan -- whose solution to sexual abuse is more sexual indoctrination.

You just can't make this stuff up! If it weren't so misguided, it might be funny. But unfortunately, this is the mentality of the Left. Its policies seed the ground for these crises, and when the problems become too serious to ignore, liberals refuse to engage in the kind of self-reflection necessary to find answers . If President Obama is committed to solving these issues -- not just as America's leader, but as a dad -- then it's time to take a stand against the sexual liberalism his party has championed.

(Emphases are ours.)

UPDATE: Perkins discussed the issue further on his Washington Watch radio program today, and added some shaming of reproductive rights advocate Sandra Fluke in for good measure. “Remember the debate over contraception?” Perkins said. “Now, it wasn’t the police department that made a hero out of the college student Sandra Fluke in that whole national campaign, crusade I should say, that she was on for unlimited birth control.”

Right Wing Leftovers - 1/16/14

  • FRC seems shocked to learn that "nearly 90 percent of abortions were procured by women who reported having three or more sexual partners." Maybe that has something to do with the fact that women ages 25-44 have an average of 3.6 sexual partners?
  • Speaking of FRC, Tony Perkins admits that "American Christians experience nothing like the gruesome punishment Christians undergo daily around the globe" but then warns that it could soon be happening here because "the precursor to persecution is always repression, the forcing-down of Christian faith into quiet corners where its visibility is limited and its impact is weakened."
  • The Conservative Campaign Committee wants to run "Thank You, Ted Cruz" ads during the Super Bowl.
  • The Independent Women's Forum is worried that women will actually take advantage of Obamacare.
  • Bryan Fischer calls on governors to refuse to comply with any judge who strikes down a state's ban on gay marriage.
  • Finally, "Five reasons why having liberal friends is a bad idea."

Anti-Choice Columnist Calls Out Fellow Religious Right Activists For Israel Hypocrisy

Religious Right activists often claim that they will never be silent about “Nazi” abortion rights …that is, unless those rights exist in Israel. We noted last week that Israel’s decision to expand public funding for abortion coverage was met with crickets from many American anti-choice groups that also embrace Christian Zionism and accuse President Obama of being unfriendly to Israel.

These organizations, of course, would have erupted with rage if the Obama administration had even contemplated implementing a similar policy.

In a column today, a writer at the conservative Catholic website Aleteia calls out U.S abortion rights opponents for responding to Israel’s new policy “with little comment or condemnation,” wondering if they either “missed the story” or think “abortion in Israel just doesn’t matter.”

Aleteia’s Mark Gordon writes that in order to be consistent, the same anti-choice movement that demands a ban on government funds for abortion coverage and groups like Planned Parenthood in the U.S. should also call for the end of U.S. aid to Israel: “American taxpayers should not be put in the position of underwriting the culture of death. But if that’s true of Obamacare – and it is – then shouldn’t it be true for American foreign aid?”

American pro-life and pro-family groups responded to the December announcement with little comment or condemnation. Lifesitenews.com chose to run an anodyne report on the policy change, but not editorialize. The Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (C-FAM), whose mission is to “defend life and family at international institutions and to publicize the debate,” had nothing to say. The same was true for National Right to Life, Priests for Life, the American Life League and most others.

Dr. Charmaine Yoest, head of Americans United for Life, did note in a statement that “Unborn lives are rich with possibilities and worth saving and government should never be used to harm life and harm women.” The Family Research Council’s Arina Grossu agreed, saying, “No government should invest its money into killing its own citizens.” She also predicted that Israeli government funding would only result in more abortions in that country.” On the other hand, Liberty Counsel, “an international nonprofit litigation, education, and policy organization dedicated to advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of life, and the family,” told its members on January 9, “there has never been a more critical time for you to show your support to Israel and its Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu!” Either someone at Liberty Counsel missed the story or abortion in Israel just doesn’t matter.

Representative Chris Smith (R-NJ), chair of the Congressional Pro-Life Caucus, declined to comment, but perhaps that’s understandable. In addition to his pro-life work, Smith is a charter member of the Israel Allies Foundation (IAF). Formed in 2006, IAF is a kind of institutional link between the US Congress and the Israeli Knesset. Smith, a Catholic, is also the House sponsor of a wonderful bill titled “The Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2013.” The measure is intended introduce much-needed transparency to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. If passed, Smith’s bill would force insurers to notify their insured whether abortion is or isn’t covered, and whether any surcharges or other fees are used to pay for abortions. In presenting his bill, Smith wrote, “Obamacare’s abortion mandate violates federal law and makes taxpayers complicit in the culture of death.”

Smith is right, of course. American taxpayers should not be put in the position of underwriting the culture of death. But if that’s true of Obamacare – and it is – then shouldn’t it be true for American foreign aid? Israel receives about $3 billion each year from American taxpayers. About 74% of that is returned to the United States in the form of contracts with American weapons manufacturers. But given the fungible nature of money, and since Israel would buy weapons with money from its own treasury in the absence of aid, the current arrangement amounts to American funding of Israeli abortions.
Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious