In spite of the column’s title, Erickson uses the colum to reaffirm his unwillingness to vote for Trump, whose campaign he calls un-American. He writes that he sees Trump “corrupting the virtuous and fostering hatred, racism, and dangerous strains of nationalism.” (He also says, for the benefit of those who accuse him of being pro-Clinton, that he believes her campaign is anti-American.)
That I see so many Christians justifying Donald Trump’s immorality, defining deviancy down, and turning to anger and despondency about the future tells me I cannot in good faith support Donald Trump because his victory would have lasting, damaging consequences for Christianity in America. We harm our witness and the testimony of the strength of our Lord by embracing the immoral, unrepentant strong man. We harm our American virtue by buying into the idea that one man can make America great again. Further, we risk losing Donald Trump’s soul for the sake of our selfishness.
Erickson also slams Wayne Grudem for trying to justify support for Trump after having written in 2012 that if evangelicals didn’t support Romney, they would end up with Rudy Giuliani, “a pro-abortion, pro-gay rights candidate who is on his third marriage and had a messy affair prior to his divorce from his second wife. Then we will lose any high moral ground and the enthusiasm of the evangelical vote.” Asks Erickson, “How now can Grudem advance his witness to questioning unbelievers? He now praises an unrepentant man both guilty of and proud of the very sins he attacked Giuliani for.”
In response to a question from Deace about conservative fear-mongering about the consequences of the election—that the country could not survive a Clinton presidency—Erickson noted the same was said about Obama. Erickson says he tries not to demonize his opponents, saying that while he believes Hillary Clinton should be in jail, “she’s no Vladimir Putin.”
“This election is not the end of the world,” said Erickson, adding that the question that people will be asking the day after the election will be “who sold their soul and who didn’t?”
When Deace asked what his vocal opposition to Trump has cost him, Erickson said his radio show has lost advertisers, his kids have been yelled at in the grocery store, and he has had to hire armed guards to protect his house.
The National Religious Broadcasters sponsored a debate on Friday morning between two Never Trump evangelicals and two evangelical Trumpers. The event, held at the National Press Club, was emceed by NRB’s President and CEO Jerry Johnson, who called it a “family conversation.” Johnson, whose own inclinations seemed to rest with Trump’s advocates, was careful to say that NRB members are on both sides of the debate and the group itself does not support or oppose political candidates.
Representing the Never Trump position: pundit Erick Erickson and Bill Wichterman, who served in George W. Bush's White House. Arguing that evangelicals should rally around Trump were radio host Janet Parshall and anti-gay activist Bishop Harry Jackson. The event was structured with two rounds, starting with an Erickson v Parshall bout, followed by a Jackson v Wichterman match-up.
Erickson got the ball rolling saying he wouldn’t tell people not to vote for Trump, but he said that Christians with public platforms should not support Trump publicly “because I think it’s harmful for our witness.” When asked about Jesus, he said Clinton called Him her savior, and Trump gave vague and rambling responses.
Justifying support for Trump based on “values,” he said, runs up against the reality of Trump’s behavior as someone who “has bragged in his books about multiple affairs, including with married women, has cheated widows and single moms and the elderly out of money through Trump University, has stiffed the low-income worker on his buildings, telling them if they want to collect everything they’re owed they need to sue. Why do you go with him instead of her? Well, you say, ‘our values.’ How does he represent our values?...If you want to advocate for that, OK, but how are you advancing the kingdom of God?” Trump, he noted, says he’s a Christian but has repeatedly said he has never repented or asked for forgiveness.
To those who have suggested God could be using Trump like he used biblical figures like King Cyrus, Erickson said God had done that on His own and “has never asked His people to choose the evil.” Erickson said that he’s sure that there were some in Babylon saying “go on and bow, it’s just a statue,” but that the names we remember are those who resisted.
Parshall seemed a bit peeved about Erickson’s arguments. She talked about the supermajority support Trump is getting from conservative Christians and adopted evangelical pollster George Barna’s nomenclature for “SAGE Cons” – Spiritually Active Governance Engaged Conservatives. Trump’s support from that group, she said, has grown from 11 percent early in the year to 80 to 85 percent now.
“I’m interested in keeping the republic,” Parshall said. She dismissed the question of Trump’s character by saying that everybody is a sinner and “God has a track record of using flawed and broken people, even when it doesn’t look right to us.” She read a long list of moral failings by presidents throughout history, saying, “We are not electing a Messiah.” She did a similar litany with biblical figures, saying, “Noah was a drunk. Abraham lied. Jacob was a liar. Moses was a murderer. Samson was a womanizer. Rahab was a prostitute. Elijah was suicidal. Isaiah preached naked. Jonah ran from God. Job went bankrupt. Peter denied Christ.”
Parshall suggested that Trump’s victory over the huge field of Republican competitors was a sign of God’s favor: “For those who have been praying and fasting through, during and for this process, have we now believed the sovereignty of God didn’t apply? Did He take off to Philadelphia, as W.C. Fields said? Or was a God sovereign in this entire process? Can God raise up a leader who just doesn’t look right to us, but is exactly who God wants for such a time as this?”
During a Q&A session, Parshall said that evangelicals should look to Trump’s pick of Mike Pence, “who represents everything we evangelicals love and support,” as his running mate. Wichterman said that the vice president has as much power as the president wants him to have. Trump, he said, is not someone who surrounds himself with people who challenge his authority or is willing to hear from dissenting opinions. “I don’t have any confidence that Mike Pence, a good man, will be able to have that influence on Donald Trump,” he said.
In his response to Parshall, Erickson said essentially that yes, we are all sinners, but do we revel in our sin or repent of it? Are we to lower the bar or strive for something higher? Embracing Trump, he said, neither glorifies God nor advances the kingdom. Parshall responded that Christians have responsibilities on earth to be engaged culturally and politically. She said she doesn’t care that Hillary Clinton says Jesus is her savior if she also supports “the denigration of marriage” and the “annihilation of the pre-born.” She said she was interested in what a candidate will do for the country and “first, last, and always, what will you do with the court?” She said the difference between the judges Hillary Clinton would nominate and Trump’s list is “the difference between darkness and light.”
Harry Jackson started the second round, making the astonishing assertion that Trump “may be the only one who’s able to bring some substantive healing to the racial divide,” because, Jackson said, he could help the country by advancing “practical answers” on educational and economic opportunity. Black and Hispanic voters, he said, have too often settled for “the politics of grievance.”
Jackson’s top three reasons for all Christians to vote for Trump were religious liberty, the Supreme Court, and support for Israel. He cited other reasons of particular interest to Black and Hispanic Christians to back Trump, including educational reform, economic development in urban areas, and family-oriented tax policies.
Trump isn’t perfect, Jackson said, but he’s getting better. Besides, he said, a little “organized and strategic chaos” might be just what the country needs to shake up the status quo of generational poverty and explosive racial tension. “We are at a place in our culture that the folks who control the system, their grasping little fingers need to be broken off the controls.”
Wichterman, a former special assistant to George W. Bush who now runs a ministry to congressional staff, established his conservative bona fides by saying that "you’ll have a hard time getting to my right. I’m a Republican because I’m a conservative, and a conservative because I’m a Christian. I believe conservative policies best reflect a Christian worldview.” Wichterman said he had been ready to support any of the other 16 Republican candidates, but is not willing to support Trump. Wichterman said he will vote for third-party candidate Evan McMullin.
Wichterman took on three of the arguments being used to justify evangelical support for Trump: Trump is the lesser of two evils; God uses bad people for good purposes; and Trump is a “good man”—a phrase Pence repeats over and over when talking about Trump.
Wichterman says the lesser of two evils argument is the most compelling. He said he has used it himself over the years, and understands that Trump is more likely to nominate conservative judges. But that’s not enough, he said, because Trump may actually be “a threat to our democratic republic”:
I care about the Supreme Court because I care deeply about the government handed down to us by the founders…Trump, on the other hand, has too often demonstrated contempt for the rule of law. He has sounded more like a strongman impatient with constitutional constraints. He advocates death to the innocent family members of terrorists…He advocates torture, not as a means of extracting important intelligence, but as a means of retribution. He said he would do a hell of a lot more than waterboarding.
Wichterman slammed Trump for praising dictators like Vladimir Putin – who is a strong leader in the same way arsenic is a strong drink – and the Chinese officials who Trump says showed “strength” by slaughtering peaceful protesters in Tiananmen Square. He cited examples of Trump encouraging violence against protesters. “Trump admires strength whatever form it takes,” he said, which is “inimical to the Gospel.”
Wichterman challenged people who say they won’t vote for Clinton because they believe she’s a liar, but will vote for Trump hoping that he’s been lying and doesn’t really mean what he says. Trump, he said, corrupts his supporters and corrupts “what it means to be a Republican.”
Regarding the argument that God uses bad people for good purposes, Wichterman said that doesn’t mean Christians are called to do bad so that good may result. “I’ve heard some evangelical leaders say we need a bad man to stand up to the bullying of the left…It’s almost as if we’re hiring a hitman to play dirty for the sake of good government,” which is an idea, he said, that “has nothing to do with our faith.”
Wichterman said the argument that Trump is a good man, a humble man, a truth-teller, “completely mystifies me.” He cited a litany of Trump outrages, including the implication that liberal judicial nominees should be assassinated and his reckless talk about rigged elections, which could be a set-up to civil strife. “If Trump is a good man, then I’ve got an entirely different definition of what ‘good’ is,” he said.
In his response, Jackson provided an example of the kind of double standard on truth that Wichterman had talked about. Jackson said Trump ran his primary like a “shock jock,” saying things to get attention, but that he is “growing.” Jackson said that people have been failed by both parties and that Trump can be a “change agent” who can move America forward by “pragmatically” addressing race and class issues.
In his response, Wichterman took on Jackson’s “shock jock” justification for Trump’s comments. What should concern us more, he asked, that Trump means the “profoundly destructive” things he says, or that he doesn't really mean them but says them to get some votes? He thinks Trump’s repeated expressions of admiration for Putin suggest that brute strength is “what he really appreciates and adores.”
He returned to his criticism of Trump’s support for dictators and his dog-whistle on “Second Amendment” responses to possible Clinton judicial nominees. “Is that the kind of society we want,” he asked, “where we’re killing one another over our disagreements?” Wichterman said it makes his blood boil when Trump talks about “knocking the crap out of” people. Trump, he said, is “profoundly reckless” with the rule of law, which is “a precious thing.”
When the NRB’s Johnson started a Q&A session, Parshall responded to Wichterman’s support for McMullin, who is a Mormon, by attacking Mormon theology and Mitt Romney:
What I want to know is why we didn’t have this discussion four years ago. We had a man from Massachusetts who was pro-abortion before he was pro-life, who was supporting Obamacare before he said he opposed it. But far more importantly, because this is an evangelical conversation, I love my friends who are members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I’ve coalesced and worked with them on many an occasion. But this is an ecclesiastical conversation. That candidate wore underwear that he felt would protect him from harm, believed that Jesus was Satan’s spirit brother and believed that Jesus had returned already to the earth but only to the southern hemisphere. And yet we have a member of our panel who yet again is advocating another Mormon. If we’re going to have an ecclesiastical conversation about evangelicals, then let’s put doctrine on the table and see if that’s our driving factor.
In response to a later “lesser of two evils” question, Wichterman seemingly responded to Parshall’s attacks on Mormons by saying “I know many non-Christians who have wonderful character, and I know many Christians who have deplorable character.”
In response to a question about whether Trump’s comments about immigrants and others had been misinterpreted as “blanket statements,” Erickson said it is troubling that those in the alt-right who embrace a kind of white “tribalism” hear Donald Trump and think he is one of them. The campaign, he says, has made a mistake in “fostering those dog whistles for that group.”
Johnson asked Wichterman about a video created by Catholics for Trump meant to suggest that Trump’s much-criticized mocking of a disabled reporter might have been a more generic form of making fun of people. Even if you give Trump the benefit of the doubt in that specific instance, Wichterman said, Trump has a habit of “unapologetically” making fun of people for how they look, something Wichterman said is “corrosive to our national character” and “says something deeply wrong about the man’s character.”
In his closing remarks, Wichterman said people do not have to give into a binary choice. The founding fathers, he said, didn’t trust majorities, which is why they built in checks on power, including the electoral college. “I think we need to take seriously Trump’s words,” he said, “and we need to stop hoping that he’s just a huckster and a charlatan and just lying all the time.”
Promoting her new book “Sweet Freedom,” Sarah Palin spoke yesterday with Janet Parshall about how she fears that God will run out of patience with the U.S. because we “keep kicking him out of the public square.”
“You talk about how we’ve turned our back on God’s definition of marriage, how we’ve absolutely trampled underfoot this principle of the sanctity of human life,” Parshall said. “And some might say we’ve gone too far, God is no longer going to shed his grace on us. Do you think it’s too late for America?”
Palin responded that she didn’t think it was “too late” because “we know where the answers are and we know that God has so blessed this land with resources and with intelligent workforce and everything that God has blessed us with and our founders knew to dedicate that all to him when America came to be.”
“We need to do that again,” she continued. “We need to not be afraid to even tell our elected leaders that that’s what they need to be doing too, on our knees, rededicate this land to God as our founders did, though some want to deny that truthful history, as our founders did and get back to God and quit kicking him out of the public square, otherwise, yeah, you wonder how long he is going to be patient with us but, no, it’s not too late.”
She went on to say that “we know that our freedom of religion is under attack today” and that without good leadership, Americans could lose the right to “exercise their own faith as we see in these other tragic nations that aren’t allowed to exercise their freedom.”
When Ken Ham of Answers In Genesis attended the National Religious Broadcasters convention earlier this year, he sat down for an interview with Religious Right radio host Janet Parshall, who declared that marriage equality is literally the work of Satan and that ISIS and gay marriage are warning signs from God that His judgment is imminent.
"All of these assaults on the family, they might masquerade as legislative battles and judicial battles, but it's a spiritual battle," Parshall said. "It is the Devil himself, and I don't care how popular that sounds or not, going right to the core issue."
Gay marriage, she asserted, is an attempt to "negate who Christ is as the head of the church" and to call God a liar.
"How long will this go on?" she asked. "God has our attention. From ISIS to the redefinition of marriage, God is calling us to attention and if we ignore it, the church does it at its own peril":
On Monday, Ham took his case to the right-wing program "In the Market with Janet Parshall," where the host claimed that Ham is being "treated as a second class citizen" and is the victim of "viewpoint discrimination."
Ham said that the rights of all people of faith are at stake in his case. "If we don't do something about this it's like the old idea of the frog in the water that you can boil it up and boil it to death and it doesn't you're doing it because it keeps accommodating to the temperature around it," he told Parshall. "If Christians just keep accommodating and allowing this to happen more and more, we will lose that free exercise of religion."
"It's more and more of that trying to eliminate the Christian freedom that we have in this nation," he said.
Last month, on the eve of the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, House Republican leaders canceled a planned vote on a national 20-week abortion ban after Republican women and moderates objected to a provision that would have exempted rape survivors only if they filed a police report on their assault.
In an interview with Janet Parshall on Wednesday, the bill’s author, Rep. Trent Franks, said that the cancellation of the vote was “one of the great disappointments in my life.”
Pinning the change of plans on a “certain group within” the GOP, he lamented, “it’s always the water inside the ship that sinks it.”
Franks, who originally introduced the bill with no exceptions except to save the life of the pregnant woman,told Parshall that he objected to the rape exception in the first place because “none of us have any control over how we’re conceived.” He added that the reporting requirement shouldn't be a problem because after 20 weeks of pregnancy “most of the questions about sexual assault and all those other questions have been answered long before then.”
According to Eagle Forum, Franks told the group last year that "If I die and Roe v. Wade stands ... I will die a failure."
Earlier in the interview, Franks linked legal abortion in the U.S. with the brutal murder of a Jordanian pilot by the so-called Islamic State, saying, “Whether it’s the Jordanian pilot, whether it’s terrorism, all of the tragedies of the world, generally, are traced back to a lack of compassion for our fellow human beings, a lack of commitment to our fellow human beings.”
“If we don’t have the courage or the will as a country to protect the most innocent of all — children, these little pain-capable unborn babies — if we don’t have the courage to protect them, I am afraid that we will never have the courage or the will to protect any kind of liberty of any sort for this country or for anyone,” he said.
Last week, Liberty Counsel’s Mat Staver appeared on “In The Market with Janet Parshall” to argue that the LGBT rights movement is eroding America’s moral compass.
Staver pointed his finger at Christians who either support LGBT equality or have given up fighting against it, realizing they are on the losing side of a political showdown.
“There is some resolution to say, ‘Oh, we’ve lost this battle, we just need to figure out how to move forward and coexist,’” he said. “And that is a wrong, very dangerous position to be in. You cannot coexist, you cannot give up on something, that is literally an attack on God himself.”
Staver added that marriage equality is part of a larger agenda that seeks to “abolish gender, abolish sexual morals and norms” in an act that defies the “natural created order.”
“To assume that you can go against the created order is hubris, it’s arrogance, it’s dangerous and it is not something in which we can simply say, ‘the battle’s over, we need to figure out how to coexist.’ There is no coexistence,” he said.
The right-wing group Truth In Action Ministries is out with a new film warning parents that public schools are run by gay rights activists who are out to destroy religious freedom. The film features such experts as radio talk show host Janet Parshall and conservative legal activists Greg Baylor and Dee Wampler.
“So, mom and dad, if you have a school district where in fact they are introducing pernicious ideas that are antithetical to the word of God, then you are going to ask yourself who you are going to serve: Mammon or God,” Parshall asks.
Wampler, for his part, quotes Patrick Henry in urging students to refuse to complete class assignments dealing with gay rights issues, which she alleged violate their First Amendment rights.
Religious Right talk radio host Janet Parshall stopped by the American Family Association show “Today’s Issues” yesterday to discuss the recent outbreak of Ebola in West Africa.
According to Parshall, Ebola, the conflict in Ukraine, and violence in the Mideast are all messages from God telling us that the End Times are near: “God gives us a warning, another warning, another warning, another warning because he is a gentleman God.”
On her radio show last week, Religious Right broadcaster Janet Parshall praised ex-gay movement leaders like Anne Paulk, her guest on the program, for helping gays and lesbians “leave the homosexual lifestyle.”
Parshall said that Satan is responsible for increasing resistance to ex-gay therapy: “Anytime Satan can try to trample underfoot the truth that is the cross, he’ll do it, including telling people that they can’t change. You, however, are my expert witness because you changed, as did I, so that really should be the end of the discussion.”
Paulk argued that opponents of ex-gay therapy are “abusing kids” and making sure the government begins “sacrificing our youth to HIV/AIDS, syphilis and gonorrhea.”
While discussing the effectiveness of ex-gay therapy, neither mentioned Anne Paulk’s ex-husband, John Paulk, a former leader of the ex-gay movement who now says he is gay and that his sexual orientation never changed. Instead, Anne Paulk told Parshall that ex-gay therapy is just like having a diet or battling a drug abuse.
“When it comes to overeating, I can get that under control, I can become the size my body was meant to be, or I can feed it more and more and more and more and get to that 700 lbs. stage, that is unfortunately humanly possible,” she said. “If we take that and apply it to something like drug addiction, it is much harder according to the stats to overcome drug addiction than it is to leave behind homosexuality.”
Kern told Parshall that she was outraged that people wanted to make her seem like an “idiot” for simply stating that “the homosexual agenda is a bigger threat than terrorism.”
“I was using what I use as a teacher, you know when you’re teaching high school students you try to find something they can relate to, to share a concept with, so they can grasp that concept better,” Kern continued. “So everybody understands terrorism destroys people’s lives, it destroys property. All I meant was, all I was saying was the homosexual agenda is destroying people’s lives. More people have died from AIDS than have died from a terrorist attack here in America. It’s destroying the moral fiber of our nation, that’s all I meant.”
She lamented that gay rights advocates “try to ridicule you and make you feel like an idiot so that you’ll be intimidated and not speak out anymore.”
In fact, she said her detractors are actually “stoning” God himself: “It just broke my heart because so often what they were doing, they weren’t just stoning me, they were stoning and desecrating the God that I love.”
“There was just so much hate, they accuse me of being hateful, and I never once said anything hateful,” Kern said. “Such hate expressed against the Lord and against his word and then the way they, I mean, these people, I believe these people, I believe scripture teaches this, they’re deceived and to me the real hate is from those people who say ‘you’re born this way and you can’t change, deal with it.’”
But she is still very much the ex-gay activist and on Wednesday appeared on Religious Right broadcaster Janet Parshall’s radio show to “offer Biblical answers for those struggling with same sex attraction,” including her belief that gay men are punished with disease and early death for having sex with other men:
Our functionality of our bodies aligns with the intended functionality of our sexuality and put within parameters that are healthy and safe for us. Men having sex with men is medically unsound, it propels a man towards an early death by a disastrous disease. Romans 1 of course talks about that sort of thing occurring with those that do such things, ‘the due penalty for their error.’ That’s not quite what we’re after; what we’re after is repentance and rest for those who are struggling with their identity and for those who are thinking ‘am I gay?’
She later spoke to a caller who said that Satan haunted him through the night telling him he was gay, but Paulk said that since he resisted and “threw off the lie that he is gay,” he became a “whole man.”
Caller: I actually stayed up one night in college and at the time I wasn’t a Christian but I was under so much depression from previous relationships with other women that the Devil actually kept me up that night trying to tell me that ‘you’re gay, you’re gay, you’re gay’ because I was just that depressed and I was almost haunted and he was trying to make me believe that. I just kind of prayed it out because I had that biblical background and I woke up and I was like, ‘oh my gosh, it’s gone, thank the Lord.’ It’s really interesting.
Paulk: Thank you Dustin. Certainly homosexual feelings or behavior can happen and then if you come to the Lord and you repent, which means to turn away from, to change your mind about, and you repent, and you surrender to him and you his forgiveness, in 1 John 1:9 it says ‘He will forgive you and cleanse you from your unrighteousness’ and that’s exactly what happened with Dustin. You have to believe what’s true and that will set the course of your life. Dustin threw off the lie that he is gay and he is a whole man walking forward but that takes some battle, takes some fight.
Janet Parshall says the recent Grammy awards proves
that America has embraced the morals of ancient Rome.
Bryan Fischer is a conservative because "liberalism kills children."
Finally, Jim Garrow hopes that people who have been dismissed from the
military will take advantage of "having been loosened from the constraints of obedience to a master [and] serve the nation in a
new way, recognizing that the fight against a domestic enemy takes on the aspects of a guerrilla war."
Neither Parshall nor Paulk mentioned her husband’s renunciation of the ex-gay movement during the program, but Paulk was more than happy to field questions from listeners about their gay family members.
One caller said that her 27-year-old son “has chosen to be in the homosexual lifestyle” and wanted to know what to do about it.
Paulk responded that the caller’s son is “rebelling against God” and that she should have a “healthy detachment” from him due to his “choices.”
“You can then love them like you would a friend who is going astray in different areas that are damaging to friend.”
“I think the key part is being winsome” when you tell your son you are going to have a “healthy detachment” from him, she continued. “Son, I love you and I disagree with where you’re going in your life and this is why.”
But during an interview with conservative radio host Janet Parshall, McNutt admitted he was not “healed” of his homosexuality (for example, he says he fell in love with the male bassist in his Christian rock band).
“We know God heals some and others he doesn’t,” he told Parshall. “For me, the thorn remains…. Not all homosexuals get delivered of the same-sex attraction.”
Like other ex-gay activists, McNutt shared a harrowing life story of drug abuse and family problems, which are depicted as typical the life of the average gay man. McNutt said he became a sex addict and slept with “up to thirty people a day” in order to “get that masculine bond that I never got.”
“Not only was I a sex addict, but I was a homosexual on top of it, almost felt like a double whammy, you know?”
During an interview with Janet Parshall, anti-gay activist Elaine Donnelly pointed to a story about a drag performance at an Air Force base as proof that “everything we predicted is starting to happen” about the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Donnelly said that the USO may soon have drag shows and thus creating “social turmoil in the Armed Forces.”
Of course, Donnelly also predicted in 2010 that the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell would lead to the reinstatement of the draft.
“Ex-gay” activist Anne Paulk (ex-wife of ex-ex-gay activist John Paulk) joined Janet Parshall yesterday to discuss the “way out of homosexuality.” Paulk, who has previously claimed that the majority of lesbians were sexually abused as children, told Parshall that “the reason most people end up gay is because they’ve had some really broken experiences in their early childhood” and that they are “acting out in this way” in response to “sorrow and pain.”
This “expression of sin,” she added, is “really not that much different” than alcoholism, drug abuse and “relational addiction.”
I do believe that if the Church understood that it’s the outcome of pain and sorrow and interpersonal challenges, and it’s the product of personal confusion. And that’s what I used to talk on all the time in years prior, is you know what, the reason why most people end up gay is because they’ve had some really broken experiences in their early childhood. It’s just manifesting in this way. And the more you get to know about what’s underlying of homosexuality, the more you get to understand that they’re just a human being that’s been wounded. That’s a little boy who’s grown up, who’s been very desperately hurt and is acting out in this way. That’s still, that was once a little girl whose heart was broken and her body misused. And the outcome is sorrow and pain, and this is the expression of it.
And I think that’s the expression of sin altogether, and it’s our rebellion against God, our rebellion against -- what we believe we want our way to be. Homosexuality is, not unlike any other sin, it’s a shortcut to getting your own needs met, and it’s not a healthy shortcut. Drugs don’t solve the problem of trying to hide from one’s trouble. Hiding doesn’t work at all. Alcohol doesn’t work that way, relational addiction doesn’t work that way, promiscuity doesn’t solve anything. Same thing with homosexuality. And I think when people understand that they’re really not that much different, it’s just a different outworking of similar underlying issues, it helps a lot.
But, like Sandy Rios, who takes heart in the fact that gay people sometimes get their hearts broken, Paulk has hope for gays and lesbians. “Even people in the gay community will celebrate someone’s amazing marriage, like the prince and the princess of England,” she said, meaning that they are in fact capable of understanding “the big picture of beauty that God has in mind.”
On her radio show this week, Janet Parshall spoke with Robert L. Maginnis, a retired Army lieutenant colonel and the current senior fellow for national security at the Family Research Council, about the Pentagon’s recent decision to lift the ban on women serving in combat units.
Maginnis, who recently wrote a book on the topic, said that allowing women into combat goes against science. He called the situation “tragic,” “unnecessary,” “immoral,” and “un-American.”
Maginnis: I’m concerned about the direction of my country. I see this as a tragic mistake that’s going to weaken our fighting forces, compromise the battle proven standards that we’ve shed a lot of blood over the last couple centuries for. And also it’s unnecessary risk for the people that ultimately are pushed into this environment. And finally I think it’s immoral and I think it’s un-American what these people want to do. And yet, I see- the subtitle I think is very fair- I see cowardice on the Capitol Hill. Because our Founders were wise people. They said we want the Congress to set the rules and regulations for the armed forces. And guess what, they haven’t had a hearing in 34 years in the House armed services and they haven’t had one in 23 years in the Senate. They’ve relegated, they’ve abandoned the responsibility that the founders intended them to have and they’ve pushed it into the administration. And the administration, you know, they’re going to do what’s politically expedient. And that just hurts my heart. Cause I know the environment that we’re going to push these young people into, I know how vicious it is. And it just doesn’t fit with the science and common sense, much less the interests of our country.
Parshall, for her part, blamed the decision on the “radical feminist movement,” claiming the policy change would not only “push women” into a situation that they don’t want to be in, it flies in the face of God and what is “natural.”
“I thought men were made by God to defend women,” Parshall lamented. “It was just a natural.”
Parshall: So it begs the question- and I'm asking it, but at some level it's rhetorical- and that is, why we got here? But Bobby you and I have been in Washington. We watched the radical feminist movement. We saw the residuals of all of that, so this is just a tendril outreach it seems to me. But it goes deeper than just ardent feminism. It violates a core principle. And I’m going to say something terribly politically incorrect. I thought men were made by God to defend women. It was just a natural. And to push women into combat, front line combat- and you draw a distinction by the way between high intensity combat and high intensity police work which I love and I want you to explain in a minute. It seems to me to violate the very core at some level of how God designed us. Is that an overreaction on my part?
Maginnis: Not at all, Janet. Men are hard wired to protect women.
Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel continued to levelattacks against the Supreme Court’s DOMA decision. On Janet Parshall’s radio show last week, Staver compared Justice Anthony Kennedy, who wrote the majority opinion in Windsor, to former Chief Justice Robert B. Taney, infamous for writing the Dred Scott ruling.
The Liberty University Law School dean told Parshall that the court decided wrongly in part because “our history has actually criminalized homosexual behavior” and alleged that Kennedy decided to “label everyone who believes and affirms in the natural created order of marriage between a man and a woman as a bigot and a hater.”
“How dare this court. How dare Justice Kennedy. How dare he actually give those kinds of labels to people,” Staver said. “I think the court crossed the line to illegitimacy by doing so and I think it put itself in the same category as Chief Justice Taney in the 1857 Dred Scott decision in which they said blacks were inferior human beings not entitled to citizenship, as they did in the 1927 Buck v. Bell case that said ‘sorry Carrie Buck, Virginia has a right to forcibly sterilize you.’”
Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ), who introduced several anti-choice bills in Congress including the recent 20-week ban, appeared on In The Market With Janet Parshall yesterday to warn about the deleterious societal consequences of not banning abortion. The congressman said if Americans “turn a blind eye” to the “horror” of legal abortion, “I wonder then what hope remains.”
“If we still let ourselves become insensitive at that point then I really am afraid for us as a human society,” he continued.
Franks then onceagain likened abortion rights to slavery and racism: “We wonder how our forbearers dehumanized African Americans, we wonder and say, ‘couldn’t they see the humanity in them?’ But they didn’t. And today we think they were so blind yet we are blind staggering blind in our own generation.”