GOProud, a group for gay conservatives, was bounced from the American Conservative Union’s annual Conservative Political Action Conference in 2012 when a coalition of social conservatives pulled out in protest of the group’s participation. This year the group has been “welcomed” back – not in the sense of having a table or other visible presence, but in the sense of GOProud leaders being allowed to attend, according to some news reports, as guests of the ACU. GOProud co-founder Chris Barron criticized the group’s current leaders for touting the conditional return as a victory, saying they were letting themselves be used as “stooges” for anti-gay conservatives.
But even this mild and invisible welcome is too much for Tradition, Family, and Property, the far-right Catholic organization whose members sport bright scarlet capes. Walk by TFP’s table and someone will eagerly hand you a flyer explaining “Why GOProud Does Not Belong at CPAC.” GOProud is memorably portrayed as a rainbow-colored beaver, gnawing away at the social conservative leg of the conservative movement (the other two legs being fiscal and defense-oriented conservatives).
Why is GOProud a welcomed and official guest at CPAC, when it advocates the legalization of same-sex “marriage,” thus undermining the votes and dreams of millions of God-fearing Americans?
How can GOProud consider itself conservative when it directly opposes the work of social conservative activists and contributes to America’s moral ruin, through the weakening of the family – the first and fundamental building block of society?
TFP’s flyer says it protests against GOProud’s efforts to “cast itself as a bone fide member of the conservative movement.” TFP believes:
To be true to itself, the conservative movement must battle on all three conservative fronts (defense, fiscal, and social).
That individuals and organizations who subscribe to only one or two of the conservative movement’s three legs are still welcome to join the coalition, but should refrain from publicly opposing the rest of the movement’s efforts on the leg or legs they disagree on.
TFP says welcoming GOProud into the conservative movement would be like a communist or socialist organization seeking admittance to the conservative movement by claiming to be against abortion. As part of the evidence that TFP marshals to prove that GOProud is not conservative, it notes that the group’s website says it encourages “committed stable, relationships between two people, regardless of sexual orientation, that promote healthy families and create value within our society.” Mercy!
TFP does have some kind words for the ACU, applauding the decision to deny American Atheists a booth at CPAC. But that didn’t prevent American Atheists from distributing a CPAC flyer that says “Christianity’s influence on conservatism is pushing away almost 20 million voters – more than enough to swing an election.”
Bryan Fischer threw down the gauntlet on his radio program today, declaring the fight against homosexuality to be the defining battle of our time.
Asserting that America's future will be determined by "whether the forces of light or darkness will prevail in the battle over special rights based on sexually deviant behavior," Fischer asserted that "everywhere that Big Gay gains ground, Christ is forced into retreat."
As such, everything hinges on this battle and if the "forces of sexual normalcy" win, then America will once again become a beacon of morality and decency for the entire world. But, Fischer warned, "if the forces of sexual deviancy prevail ... every part of our culture will be corrupted, it will be contaminated beyond repair and America ... will plunge the world into a moral abyss of darkness and depravity":
On the most recent "CitizenLink Report" from Focus on the Family, Stuart Shepard and Bruce Hausknecht defended the recently vetoed legal discrimination bill in Arizona as nothing more than "an otherwise ordinary bill" that was badly misrepresented by gay activists.
As Shepard explained, the push for gay rights will not stop until Christian are compelled to celebrate same-sex marriages under the force of law and Hausknecht agreed, saying that what gay activists ultimately seek is the "coerced acceptance of all of their actions, behaviors, and whatnot."
"That's the direction the country is headed," Hausknecht declared. "It's a sad story to actually have to tell people."
Shepard concluded that the entire issue is rooted in the fact that gay people are in deep psychological and emotional pain but refuse to accept the fact that it is their own behavior that is causing such pain and instead lash out at Christians in order to use the law to force Christians into silence on this issue:
Apparently, Benghazi didn’t cause the Ukraine crisis after all. American Family Association radio host Kevin McCullough said yesterday that Russian president Vladimir Putin decided to seize Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula as a result of a drag show fundraiser on a US military base in Okinawa.
McCullough said Putin feels he can “get away” with his invasion of Crimea “because of what he has seen disintegrate culturally right in front of everybody’s eyes in the US” along with “the sissification of our military.”
“Putin looks at the US and we’re having drag shows on our bases,” McCullough continued. “Do developments like this have anything to do with making our military leaders look less impressive in the eyes of the world? For instance, does Mr. Putin sit there and go, ‘Yeah, I’m not going to do anything Obama says because number one, he can’t keep his word, and number two, your military is now having drag shows on its bases.’”
Yesterday, we reported that Ohio anti-gay activist Phi Burress appeared alongside Linda Harvey to criticize gay rights advocates as “bullies” who seek to “brainwash” Americans.
Later in the show, the Citizens for Community Values president told Harvey that “many homosexual men have as many as two hundred sex partners.” Brurress cited the gay rights group Lambda Legal to back up his claim, but he is most likely referring to “The Lambda Report,” a newsletter distributed by the virulent gay rights opponent Peter LaBarbera.
Harvey agreed with Burress’ wild assertion and insisted that gay rights groups “push kids to early sexual behavior.”
Burress also criticized the plaintiffs who are challenging an Ohio law that prohibits same-sex couples from adding both names to their child’s birth certificate.
“This defies common sense,” Burress said, joking: “It’s like I’m going to take my cat and try to get a dog license for it, and when they tell me, ‘No that’s a cat,’ I’m going to say, ‘No it isn’t, it’s a dog,’ and see what they say.”
“Did the world stop and start spinning backwards or something?”
Liberty Counsel attorney Matt Barber’s new website, BarbWire, today ran an article, “Michael Sam, Jason Collins & The Gayification Of Professional Sports,” which warned that by accepting openly gay athletes like Sam and Collins, professional sports leagues are “becoming just another venue for breeding and promoting selfish, shallow professionals.”
BarbWire contributor Tom O’Toole was especially upset by Sam’s announcement, lamenting that “we see the rare heroism of a born leader being frittered away, a young man being deceived by everyone from the president on down into believing his sin is his glory, his shame is his fame.”
In the rough and tumble world of professional (and big-time college) sports, where until recently it was at least okay to be wary of gay teammates in the locker room, we now find that all bets of rational natural decency are off. First, when former University of Missouri football star, Michael Sam, declared himself “gay and proud of it,” we found both politicians and athletes alike falling over themselves to sing his praises first. Then, after 35-year-old NBA journeyman Jason Collins (who previously received MSM hero worship last season when he was released from the Celtics and came out of the closet), actually got a gig with the New Jersey Nets recently, he received standing ovations in arenas around the league, surely the most acclaimed 10-day contract player ever in the history of the NBA. But while these men may indeed be heroes (even to devout Catholics!), it’s up to Christians everywhere to point out to the young and impressionable, that they are being worshiped for the wrong reasons.
Getting back to my first point, with the secular deification of Collins and Sam, it seems that not only will a male Christian athlete get vilified as a homophobic if he objects to homosexuality in principal, he no longer can even question the place of a nude gay man in the largely straight guy shower. Since both Collins and Sam admit to being attracted to men, you would think it common sense that a straight man wouldn’t want to show off the parts that gays are particularly attracted to, especially in close quarters. Does this also mean that if a college man is allowed to play on a women’s sports team since that sport is not offered to men–also once thought wacky, but recent court decisions don’t agree–that women are supposed to be accepting of his naked presence in the shower/locker room while they are also undressing? Fortunately, most female athletes I talked to still are freaked out over this potential invasion of modesty, but there’s something fishy when the natural attraction to the opposite sex can be objected to in the locker room, but the unnatural attraction to the same sex cannot.
For Sam to overcome his parents’ separation, to watch one older brother die from a gunshot wound, see two other brothers go to prison and another disappear, never to be found…is a lot to expect any kid to endure and not lose hope. Now add to this his sister dying in infancy, plus being homeless and living out of his mother’s car, and Sam still being mentally tough enough to become not only the only kid in his family to attend college, but earn All-American honors in football, and that’s about as heroic as it gets. Ironically, it is the one thing for which society praises him most–that is, being an active open homosexual–that is about the only thing for which he is not a hero. And that statement is not according to me or Fox TV, but to God and His Only begotten Son.
That is why Michael’s descent is so tragic, for we see the rare heroism of a born leader being frittered away, a young man being deceived by everyone from the president on down into believing his sin is his glory, his shame is his fame. In the meantime, sports, once one of the greatest avenues for both molding and inspiring selfless young heroes, is now becoming just another venue for breeding and promoting selfish, shallow professionals. And that, my friends, is nothing to cheer about.
At last year's Values Voter Summit, Star Parker attacked the gay rights movement, telling gay people to "keep it private."
Now, Parker is warning that "the 'gay rights' crusade" wants "to push Christian reality, once and for all, into the closet and to lock the door."
Parker writes in a WorldNetDaily column this week, entitled, "'Gay' Agenda: A Cultural War Against Christians," that the demise of Arizona's "right-to-discriminate" bill means that Christian-owned businesses will lose their First Amendment rights and be "put out of business."
The reality is that the “gay rights” crusade is not about a struggle for justice, but rather it is a cultural war.
Homosexual activists understand the ongoing erosion of traditional values as a pillar of our society and use this opportunity to push Christian reality, once and for all, into the closet and to lock the door.
The cultural script has been re-written such that Christians have been put in a position of either rejecting the precepts and prohibitions of their religion, or being faithful to them and being branded as against “equality.”
Christians have been put in the untenable position that being true to their faith means, by the new standards set in our society, being labeled a bigot and then being exposed to being put out of business.
Let’s keep in mind that the idea of religious freedom only means something as long as religion means something.
It is critical that Christians draw the line and continue the struggle and not allow religion or religious freedom to be compromised. Individuals or businesses forced to supply goods or services for activities against the precepts of their faith must refuse and call forth their protection under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
"Coach" Dave Daubenmire doesn't understand what is so "special" about homosexuality that people get so upset when he criticizes, since nobody gets mad when he criticizes other sins like alcoholism and lying.
In fact, it is not all that long ago, Daubenmire reminded his viewers, when homosexuality was widely considered to be a mental illness, just as "schizophrenic pedophilia" is considered to be one today. Be he didn't "want to even get into the debate because the gay bashers will get after me again" for even bringing up the issue.
"What is so special about that sin?" Daubenmire wanted to know. "Why is it there's a movement behind that that is one of the most aggressive movements out there attacking Christian values?"
Last year, Anne Paulk and her husband, ex-gay poster boy John Paulk, separated after he announced that he is still gay and criticized the ex-gay movement.
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.
Keith Fournier, the editor of Catholic Online and head of the Common Good Alliance, issued a warning today in response to the Texas marriage equality decision, predicting that same-sex marriage will lead to as much violence as China’s Cultural Revolution, which left millions dead.
In a post on Matt Barber’s website BarbWire, Fournier writes that marriage must be “liberated” from gay people who are ushering in “nothing less than a Cultural Revolution. I know that some of my readers do not like it when I use the term Cultural Revolution. They object because the term was identified with the reassertion of Maoism in China. That movement, which turned violent, caused extraordinary social turmoil. That is PRECISELY why the analogy is apropos.”
Encouraging readers to attend a National Organization for Marriage march in June, he hailed anti-gay activists as the “true liberators” and “advocates for a society of human flourishing and freedom” who are preventing the “cultural slide into the abyss of relativism.”
Like propagandists of the past, they attempt to frame public perception by calling those who defend marriage as being against what they call ‘marriage equality’. However, homosexual and lesbian partnerships are incapable of achieving the ends of marriage. The marchers in China, in France and all over the world are the proponents, the defenders, of true liberation. They are advocates for a society of human flourishing and freedom. They defend real marriage and thereby defend the rights of children to a mother and father. They promote the common good.
The marchers are a part of a global Marriage Defense Movement. This new counter-cultural movement is about to reshape history. It crosses racial, ethnic, socio-economic, religious, philosophical and political lines. The members of this Marriage Defense movement seek to defend and to liberate marriage from the propagandists and Cultural Revolutionaries who oppose it and are working undermine it. They seek to defend marriage.
Marriage ‘is what it is’, to use a popular expression. The effort to redefine the word and then use the mechanisms of the State to entirely restructure this institution inscribed in the Natural Law – and replace it – is what is at stake here. Those who advocate giving moral and legal equivalency to homosexual and lesbian relationships are the people who oppose marriage. Their intention is to entirely reorder civil society. They use the phrase ‘marriage equality’ in an Orwellian act of verbal engineering.
This is a propaganda ploy and a tactic aimed at nothing less than a Cultural Revolution. I know that some of my readers do not like it when I use the term Cultural Revolution. They object because the term was identified with the reassertion of Maoism in China. That movement, which turned violent, caused extraordinary social turmoil. That is PRECISELY why the analogy is apropos.
To state this bluntly is not to be ‘anti-gay’; it is simply to defend marriage and the common good. This is a noble cause. Those who promote and defend marriage are not bigots, they are the true liberators! Though the Marriage Defense Marchers represent every segment of society, and reflect a wide range of ages, ethnic identities and political persuasions, they were collectively labeled as conservatives in much of the international press.
There is a growing intolerance spreading which directly threatens our rights to free expression, association and political participation. This is reflected in a brazen effort to censor any speech which questions the cultural slide into the abyss of relativism. Efforts to prevent our vocal and public defense of the objective truth about marriage and the family are multiplying. However, they are not succeeding. The streets of Washington, DC need to be filled with hundreds of thousands of supporters of Marriage on June 19, 2014.
Last week, World Congress of Families spokesman Don Feder joined Rick Scarborough on a Tea Party Unity conference call, where Feder got to talking about how liberals “intimidate” conservative pastors into not speaking out against gay rights.
As luck would have it, Scarborough was ready with a “very fresh and very real” anecdote to illustrate that this "threat" comes not just from gay rights activists, but from parishioners who don't want to hear about anal sex in church:
Well, let me give you a perspective that’s very fresh and very real. When pastors speak on this issue, it’s not just a threat that comes from the left that they fear.
I spoke in a church the last four days – I don’t recall the name of the church, so maybe somebody on the line listening from that church, if they are, they’re going to be very familiar with what I’m about to say – but in the second service out of five, I mentioned the word ‘anal sex’ illustrating what homosexuality actually is. And I know that that’s a repulsive expression, I know that nobody likes to think about it, but Christians need to understand what we’re talking about. This is not a gay activity, it’s a perversion. And it does carry consequences because of the nature of the act.
The one thing that the homosexual community doesn’t want us to talk about is what they actually do. They love to disguise their activities with euphemisms. And the presentation they always give is some handsome, erudite young man that’s a gift to society, when in fact he’s committing indecent acts with consequences.
But the firestorm that one, two-word expression caused among the Christians in the church was just palpable, and consequently a segment of the church didn’t come to another service of revival and just basically boycotted because they found what I said to be reprehensible. In other words, the church families don’t find what they’re doing reprehensible, but they put such pressure on the preachers not to even mention it that a lot of preachers have gone silent.
So, it’s not just the fear of the left, it’s the fear of the right, because Christians are more concerned about what their sensitive ears have to listen to than what’s taking place at the high school that may be perverting their own children.
So, we’ve got a real challenge. Will the pastor be forced to speak to it? I sure hope so. But the reality is, a lot of the problem is in the pew as well as the pulpit.
WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah is fuming over the demise of the “right-to-discriminate” bill that passed the Arizona state legislature, arguing that Gov. Jan Brewer’s veto is “one more nail in the coffin of the First Amendment.”
In a column today, Farah defends anti-LGBT job discrimination and lambasts “homosexualists” as “part of a religious cult” that unfairly smeared the Arizona legislation in an effort to “kill the First Amendment.”
“Soon the land of the free will no longer be,” he concluded.
The homosexualists, who, whether they admit or not, are part of a religious cult themselves, went to work. Their friends in the media joined in the chorus, proclaiming the law would create Jim Crow-style situations in which a class of people would be denied service at lunch counters. And Jan Brewer vetoed the bill.
The kind of “discrimination” we don’t like is when people are unfairly treated on the basis of their race, ethnicity or religion. That’s what this bill sought to do. But is it wrong to discriminate against people on the basis of their behavior? Let’s say a male job applicant wearing a dress comes for an interview at your office. Should you be forced to weigh his credentials and experience on an equal basis with others who are dressed more conventionally?
I don’t think so.
On almost a daily basis now we’re seeing one more nail in the coffin of the First Amendment.
Soon the land of the free will no longer be.
For heaven’s sake, if you want a wedding cake with two men on the top layer, hire a baker who thinks it’s cute. Don’t pick the one with the fish on the window. And don’t kill the First Amendment over it.
Yesterday, anti-gay pastor Scott Lively told Religious Right radio host Janet Mefferd that there is a Satanic, socialist “conspiracy” to “homosexualize the world” that can only be stopped by a “revolution.”
Lively didn’t discuss this supposed gay-demonic conspiracy during his appearance today on NPR, but he didn’t exactly tone down his rhetoric either.
Speaking with NPR’s Michel Martin, Lively defended Uganda’s harsh new anti-gay law, arguing that the “gay movement has really brought this on themselves” and that the law is necessary to stop pedophiles.
When confronted with remarks made by a gay Ugandan activist Frank Mugisha about how anti-gay bias affects his daily life, Lively insisted that Mugisha is the real victim.
In an interview with Janet Mefferd yesterday about his call for the impeachment of Attorney General Eric Holder, pastor William Owens insisted that President Obama is “anti-Christian” and the worst president in at least the last 75 years.
“We elected the wrong black president,” Owens said. “His strategy was, ‘If I get the Catholic Church, I can get all the churches because of their size; let’s knock them off, we’ll get all of them.’ He’s anti-Christian, he stands up for no Christian values whatsoever.”
Owens told Mefferd that he’s refraining from calling for the impeachment and removal of President Obama because he wants the president to leave a legacy of backing marriage equality and being the worst president ever: “Since he took this bold position and he wants to leave a legacy, we’re gonna see that he does leave a legacy, that he does leave the legacy that he did more to demoralize this country than anybody, any president, any administration since I’ve been here and I’m seventy-five years old.”
Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-KS) said this week that he will join efforts to impeach of Attorney General Eric Holder over his stance on marriage equality, citing a petition by the Coalition of African-American Pastors and accusing Holder of trying to “thwart” the Constitution by not defending the Defense of Marriage Act.
Of course, the Obama administration would be far from the first administration to decline to defend an unconstitutional law, with Republicans and Democrats alike doing the same in the past.
Several Republicans have already proposed a resolution seeking Holder’s impeachment.
“More lawlessness from a lawless administration; Attorney General Holder should not advise other attorneys general to violate their oaths of office. These elected officials have a duty and a solemn obligation to defend their states’ laws and Constitution - not allow ideology and politics to cloud their legal decisions. Whatever one’s personal opinions on the Second Amendment, the Internal Revenue Service, controlled substances, the freedom of the press, or even marriage, an Attorney General simply can’t pick and choose the laws or parts of the Constitution he or she would like to defend.
“In recent years, I have grown increasingly concerned by Holder’s actions – and those of others in the Obama Administration - to disregard the laws and the Constitution they have sworn to defend. I am not alone in these concerns. Dozens of my colleagues have called upon Holder to resign. Dozens have asked the President to remove Holder from office. Additionally, on June 28, 2012, 255 members of the U.S. House of Representatives held Mr. Holder in Contempt of Congress. It is the Attorney General’s job to uphold the Constitution and the law - not ignore it, nor rewrite it, nor encourage other attorneys general to thwart it.
“This has gone on far too long. The lawlessness at the Department of Justice - of this Administration - must end now. That is why I am announcing today my co-sponsorship of H.Res. 411, which introduces five articles of impeachment against Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr.”
WASHINGTON – In response to Arizona Governor Jan Brewer’s decision to veto Senate Bill 1062, a measure that would have allowed businesses to discriminate against LGBT customers, People For the American Way president Michael Keegan released the following statement:
“Almost four years after Arizona shocked the country with its anti-immigrant ‘show me your papers’ law, yesterday Governor Brewer avoided making her state the national leader, once again, in state-sponsored discrimination.
“In Arizona and across the country, Americans can see through the Right’s continued attempts to cloak anti-gay bigotry in the language of First Amendment rights. We hope that the pushback Arizona received this week will be a message, loud and clear, to the states with similar bills pending. Americans don’t want to live in a country where businesses have free rein to post a ‘No Gays’ sign.”
In the past week, tens of thousands of PFAW members and activists spoke out and urged Governor Brewer to veto the bill.
Concerned Women for America senior fellow Janice Shaw Crouse is once again saying that she is furious that President Obama would dare criticize the harsh Ugandan law that makes being gay a crime punishable with life imprisonment.
In a statement today, Crouse tried to claim that she doesn’t necessarily support the Ugandan law, she just thinks that people are wrong to oppose it.
She writes that Obama’s denunciation of the anti-gay law shows that he only cares about “special interest campaigns” and “special rights, not human rights,” and represents “an affront, even a mockery, of those Judeo-Christian values that have been the foundation of virtually all Western civilizations across time and cultures.”
Last week, I was called by a reporter who said he wanted to interview me about President Obama’s statement that “homosexuality is a human right.” He said that the president’s recent comments about the situation in Uganda elevated homosexuality to the level of a “human right” or a “universal fundamental freedom.” My remarks were simply that the president of the United States has the responsibility to represent the entire nation. When he states his personal beliefs and values and presents those as representative of the United States of America, the full force of his office is behind those statements. It is clear that the beliefs of the president about “human rights” are controversial in his own country and offensive to many both in the U.S. and abroad, and serve to promote the political homosexual agenda worldwide. Claiming that homosexuality is a “human right” is an affront,¬¬ even a mockery, of¬¬ those Judeo-Christian values that have been the foundation of virtually all Western civilizations across time and cultures.
That critique is not an endorsement of Ugandan law. Concerned Women for America (CWA) supports the human rights of everyone, including homosexuals. The president should have criticized brutality (though he has not done that in some other notable international incidents) without embracing and promoting the political agenda of a relatively small special interest group.
The basic principles of religious liberty and freedom of speech are the context in which I criticized Mr. Obama. In this respect, Mr. Obama has been “arrogant,” and his actions have constituted “cultural imperialism.” One of Concerned Women for America’s (CWA) core issues is “national sovereignty,” and we defend the sovereignty of our own country, as well as that of other nations. We are an American organization, and our involvement in other nations is solely on the issue of national sovereignty and the other core issues (like Family and Life) that we share with our international colleagues. We analyze the statements of public officials, including the president, as they touch on our core issues; we have suggested that the president should forcefully condemn nations that violate the civil rights of homosexuals and women, but that approach is significantly different from the president’s endorsing and promoting the special interest campaigns of “homosexual rights” and “women’s rights” activists — campaigns that are political in nature and ask for approval rather than acceptance, that ask for special rights, not human rights.
Scott Lively said yesterday that a global Satanic “conspiracy” is “homosexualizing the world” and only a “revolution” of gay rights opponents can stop it.
In an interview with Religious Right talk show host Janet Mefferd, Lively insisted that gay rights victories are “proof of the conspiracy, we’re talking about the elites represented in the federal judiciary, across the top strata of our society — I don’t think there is really much difference between the Republicans and Democrats at that level — and they are imposing a global socialist agenda on all of us.”
“These federal judges are acting against all legal precedent in favor of this brand new, invented category of human rights; in four thousand years of human rights jurisprudence, sodomy has never been recognized as a human right,” Lively said. “Yet now, not only is it recognized as a human right but it’s trumping legitimate human rights like religious freedom and family values. Nothing short of a revolution is going to stop this.”
“It’s just astonishing how rapidly they are proceeding in homosexualizing the whole world,” he lamented.
Lively called the gay rights movement a demonic push to bring about the Last Days: “This is the moral issue of the End Times, it’s clearly a spiritual phenomenon, in the space of just fifty years this movement has gone from being illegal — homosexuality, homosexual sodomy was illegal in every country of the world except for Sweden which legalized it in in 1938 — and now this tiny group of people, 1 to 2 percent of the population, has more power in the legislatures and the courtrooms of the world than the Christian church does.”
“The most powerful countries of the world have almost completely been given over to the principalities behind this agenda,” Lively added. “Christians really need to recognize that this is spiritual warfare and it cuts right to the heart of what it means to be a human being created in the image of God.”
Lively added that the gay rights movement has moved the world into an “age of apostasy” and anti-gay activists must be ready to “give up our lives if necessary.”
He later called on activists to speak “into the face of the demons that are grabbing a hold of our society and tearing it down” and not to listen to “weenies“ who have fallen for “the lie of the pit of Hell.”
The pastor also praised Uganda’s president for “standing up for the truth” against “the powers of the earth” by signing his country’s new draconian anti-gay law.
UPDATE: The Mississippi Business Journal reports: “The Mississippi House of Representatives Civil Subcommittee late Wednesday voted to strike provisions of a so-called ‘religious freedom’ bill.”
The Mississippi state legislature may soon approve its own anti-gay “right-to-discriminate” bill, which already passed the State Senate as part of legislation that adds “In God We Trust” to the state seal.
The Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty criticized a similar bill in Georgia that the group warned would turn religion into “an automatic trump card.”
The Mississippi ACLU said the bill may even go farther than the legislation passed in Arizona: “We are worried that this bill is broader than the Arizona bill. The bill would allow the government finding of discrimination by defining ‘burden’ to include withholding government benefits.”
The ACLU reports:
Senate Bill 2681, the Mississippi Religious Freedom Restoration Act, does not restore or expand religious freedom. It is simply a license to discriminate.
-In its current form, this law could allow people to argue that their religious beliefs exempt them from complying with laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, color, and national origin.
-This law would give private individuals and businesses a free pass to discriminate. This will allow businesses to deny basic services under the guise of religious freedom.
-This law would not protect against government funding of discrimination. By defining “burden” to include withholding of government benefits, religious organizations and individuals may use the statute to challenge exclusion from governmental programs. This could result in government funding of not only religious ends and activities, but also discrimination.
-This bill would do nothing more than allow the use of religion to discriminate and burden hardworking businesses with the threat of frivolous lawsuits.