After Mitt Romney secure the Republican nomination, prominent Southern Baptist pastor Robert Jeffress has said that Christians should vote for the Mormon candidate over President Obama since he “espouses unbiblical principles.” Such a sentiment is striking since Jeffress attacked Romney’s Mormon faith in the 2008 and 2012 primary elections, hoping that the GOP would nominate an evangelical Christian like Rick Perry over Romney as Mormonism is “a heresy from the pit of Hell.” Now, Jeffress is rallying evangelical support for Romney, despite his prior warning that electing a Mormon will lead to God’s judgment.
Jeffress told Janet Mefferd, who has also criticized Romney over his faith, that it is still better to vote for Romney, even though he is a member of a “cult” and “false religion” that believes in a “multiplicity of gods,” than Obama because of his stances on marriage equality and abortion rights. The pastor said defeating Obama is even worth potentially giving Mormon missionaries a tool to bolster “legitimacy of their faith” and make more converts.
I still think there are concerns out there among evangelicals about voting for a Mormon. I’ve made peace with it; the way I’ve made peace with it is to make it very clear on programs like yours that Mormonism is a cult, it is a false religion, Mormons worship a multiplicity of gods, they deny the Bible, in fact they think the Bible is so error-filled there had to be a second book of revelations. I want to make it very clear that I don’t believe Mormonism is Christianity but I do think that in this case it is better to vote for a non-Christian who supports biblical principles like life and marriage than voting for a professing Christian like Barack Obama who absolutely repudiates what Jesus Christ said about some key issues.
I don’t want to minimize the Mormonism issue. I had probably the most well-known pastor in America say to me last week; you know one concern is the mission implications of this, Mormons are so involved in missions overseas, they’ll be able to point to a Mormon president as legitimacy of their faith. So I think we need to be clear that Mormonism is a false religion that leads people away from rather than toward the true God, but having said that we are making this choice in spite of that.
He warned that America is “about to go over the moral and spiritual cliff from which there is no return” if Obama is re-elected, asserting that his administration is “openly involved in high-handed sins” and shaking its “fist in the face of God” on matters like same-sex marriage.
You know in the Old Testament the Bible had what it called high-handed sins, sins that were like a clenched fist in the face of God. We are now seeing an administration that is openly involved in high-handed sins: the embracing of gay marriage. A friend of mine said to me recently, ‘think about this just ten years ago if a pastor or a sandwich company were to say marriage is between a husband and a wife, a man and a woman, no one would have batted an eye at that, but today that is labeled as hate speech,’ now what has changed? It’s not the Bible or the message that has changed, it shows what has happened in our culture. I know this sounds alarmist but I believe we are at the precipice, we are at a tipping point in our country right now, we are about to go over not the fiscal cliff, we are about to go over the moral and spiritual cliff from which there is no return, and that is why it is imperative for Christians to get out and vote in this election.
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals today ruled that section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages sanctioned by the states, is unconstitutional.
Michael Keegan, President of People For the American Way, issued the following statement:
“Every federal court that has reviewed DOMA’s section 3 has found that it violates our constitutional principles. This should be no surprise. DOMA hurts gay and lesbian married couples by denying them some of the most basic protections of marriage, and it does so for no reason but prejudice against LGBT families. Our Constitution guarantees all Americans equal protection under the law, and DOMA clearly violates that principle.
“House Speaker John Boehner has wasted nearly a million and a half taxpayer dollars on defending this indefensible law. I am confident that the Supreme Court would not let DOMA stand, but I hope that they never have to review it. Most Americans don’t want to hurt their gay and lesbian neighbors, and we’ve seen over and over again that DOMA does real harm to real people. Congress must recognize the harm that DOMA has done and repeal it before it hurts more legally married Americans.”
A People For the American Way petition calling for the repeal of DOMA has gathered over 200,000 signatures.
The 700 Club today reported on Gallaudet University’s suspension of their chief diversity officer for signing a petition to put Maryland’s marriage equality law on the ballot. Gay rights advocates, including the leaders of Marylanders for Marriage Equality and Gov. Martin O’Malley have said that they strongly disagreed with Gallaudet’s decision, but host Pat Robertson tried to claim that the university’s move was representative of the entire left and the gay rights movement. “The left wants a dictatorship,” Robertson claimed, “they don’t want freedom.” The anti-gay televangelist argued that “they want a dictatorship where they control, which is what you had in communism, a small group ran the government for their ends and for the ends of their friends, and that’s what the gays want, they want everything now in their favor.” Robertson concluded by saying that “God Almighty has the final vote.”
Brian Camenker of MassResistance spoke to Sandy Rios of the American Family Association yesterday to promote his anti-gay group’s “What same-sex ‘marriage’ has done to Massachusetts” booklet. Rios insisted that marriage equality advocates have “had to do tricks, they’ve had to threaten, they’ve had to cajole” in order to legalize same-sex marriage, and Camenker said that “the whole gay marriage thing and the whole homosexual issue is artificially held up through threats and propaganda.” In fact, Camenker said that the gay rights movement will inevitably “fall” like a “house of cards” just like Nazism, slavery, segregation and Communism.
Rios: This is an area on which really still most people in Western civilization when asked do not embrace homosexual marriage. State after state has rejected it, and even in liberal New York and even in liberal California they’ve had to force it through in other ways, they’ve had to do tricks, they’ve had to threaten, they’ve had to cajole, it’s just an amazing thing. Brian I don’t know if it was you who wrote this, maybe it’s you who wrote this, that this whole wave of homosexual rights in every way—whether its marriage or workplace or whatever—you feel I believe you wrote that this is a phase, this is not something that is here to stay, this is like a fad, like a moment in history that cannot last. Are you the one that wrote that?
Camenker: I’ve written that a few times, yes, and I believe it very, very strongly. There have been times in our history when very strange things have happened and then disappeared and people thought that it would never happen. We think of the rise of Nazism in Germany and Europe, people thought that would never disappear and never change; people thought slavery would never change; I lived in the South as a young guy and nobody thought that segregation would ever end; we all remember that nobody thought that the Soviet Union and all of that would ever fall. I believe that the whole gay marriage thing and the whole homosexual issue is artificially held up through threats and propaganda and everything else. As soon as that doesn’t continue the whole things is a house of cards and will fall. People do not naturally support this. Everybody is looking with doom and gloom and everything but I believe that it is all going to fall at a certain point.
William Owens of the Coalition of African-American Pastors and the National Organization for Marriage’s religious liaison is hoping that his anti-Obama, anti-gay campaign will pay off in November by pulling black voters away from supporting Obama. While sitting down with Jamilah Lemieux of Ebony, Owens said that black voters are turning against Obama “because [our site] had nearly 90 thousand hits and 85 percent of the people are on our side on this issue” and also told Lemieux that “there isn’t such thing as separation as church and state.” Owens effectively admitted to Lemieux that CAAP is a single-issue organization dedicated to opposing same-sex marriage, insisting that marriage equality for gays and lesbians must be stopped because “the Black family has been destroyed” and will “help deteriorate the Black family more than anything else.”
JL: Black people are literally on fire right now. You have people--- teenagers, kids---dying in Chicago. Getting shot 10, 12, 30 in a night and you're sending out daily press releases about same sex marriage. Is this the greatest challenge of your generation or my generation? is this the biggest fight that we have in the middle of an election season? Do we have that much to lose from gay people getting married?
RO: I think we do. First of all, the Black family has been destroyed. When I grew up there were more Black men going to college, now there are more Black men going to prison. Something is wrong.
JL: What does that have to do with homosexuality? There are Black men who have went to college and graduate and got married and are gay and also Black men who have women who they’ve been in intimate relationships with who didn’t go to college and who don’t provide for their children. So who is the problem in our community?
RO: We're our own problem right now. We are are own problem and we need good moral leadership and I expected that from Obama. Same sex marriage is not [representative of that]...I felt that that one issue was enough to help deteriorate the Black family more than anything else.
His wife Deborah Owens made a similar assertion in a Washington Times op-ed where she warned that the “homosexual agenda” will “erode the very foundation of our society” and “place our youth on a dangerous trajectory toward a bleak future in which mothers and fathers don’t matter, values don’t matter and children are placed at risk.” She said gays and lesbians “have crept out of the closet, and now they want to take over the entire house,” arguing that Obama is “putting our country on a dangerous path and our children and families in peril” by backing their right to marry, jeopardizing “our future as a nation” and “our freedom.”
Some criticize us for not supporting the practice, but accepting homosexuals and lesbians is a separate issue from redefining marriage for millions of Americans. Homosexuals and lesbians have been around for a long time, though many of them were “in the closet.” Over time, they have crept out of the closet, and now they want to take over the entire house. If a man loves another man or a woman desires another woman, there is nothing in our current law stopping two consenting adults from engaging in a relationship, though it is not normal behavior. We are about to cross a dangerous line, with civil leaders trying to force all Americans to accept homosexual unions and change the historical and biblical definition of marriage.
The black American community already is plagued with problems related to children growing up in single-parent households. For example, a boy who lacks a father in the home is more likely to engage in delinquent and criminal behavior unless he has a positive male role model to help shape him. The homosexual agenda, which attempts to redefine family and marriage, will erode the very foundation of our society. It will place our youth on a dangerous trajectory toward a bleak future in which mothers and fathers don’t matter, values don’t matter and children are placed at risk.
Evidence shows that the lack of intact families in our society leads to social, psychological and emotional problems for children. Why would Mr. Obama want to make homosexual “marriage” equal to traditional marriage when children already face a multitude of issues? The president and others want to legitimize and normalize homosexual “marriage” and shove it down the throats of those who disagree because he is the leader and he said so.
What black person would deny the first black man running for the highest office in America a chance to become president? He represented hope for us all, and he was the realization of the dream for many Americans who never thought they would live to see a black president. We were soon disillusioned. Mr. Obama has betrayed us by his endorsement of homosexual “marriage,” putting our country on a dangerous path and our children and families in peril.
On the homosexual “marriage” issue, this black mom is not following Mr. Obama.
Our hope in man, even one man, cannot come at the cost of our hope in God.
Our future as a nation is at stake. Our freedom is in the balance. Mr. Obama has given his followers an invalid command: Endorse homosexual “marriage.” This edict must not be the law of this land. The risks are too great.
Patrick Wooden, a favorite pastor of the National Organization for Marriage, spoke to anti-gay writer Michael Brown on Line of Fire Radio yesterday where he went after President Obama and the Democratic Party’s endorsement of marriage equality. While he shied away from his usual topics about how gay men need to wear diapers until their early death as a result of a life of shoving cellphones, baseball bats and animals up their anuses, Wooden argued that President Obama is contributing to the pain of the “decimated” black community by favoring marriage equality and is sending a terrible message to black children.
My position is African Americans are people also, we want the same things that all other Americans want, we are a part of this country, we have built this country, so we should be counted also and considered. Our families, our homes have been decimated, and with the things that have happened in our community, do we need to add to it a President where little black boys and little black girls are hearing this great man in the most powerful position in the land say ‘I believe same-sex marriage is the direction that the country ought to go in.’ Then that same little black boy or little black girl looks to the heroes in the black community at the local level which are the preachers and the community leaders and the NAACP leaders and then they see the leaders line up and follow this man. What kind of message are we sending our children? And we’re the most vulnerable.
While Wooden said he doesn’t plan to vote for Romney since he is “a bishop in a cult,” he did warn that marriage equality will ultimately force churches to hold same-sex wedding ceremonies and end the freedom of religion. He said that the Democratic Party platform “actively supports evil” by endorsing abortion rights and gay equality, calling same-sex marriage “the greatest oxymoron that I know” and asserting that its supporters have embarked on “an evil endeavor.” Christians who back Democrats therefore are “sowing to the flesh and they’re going to reap corruption, they are sowing to the wind and they’re going to reap the whirlwind.”
The same God of the Bible who will not allow me to vote for the most pro-abortion, same-sex marriage president that we’ve ever had will not allow me to vote for a bishop in a cult. Now, some argue that well even though Mitt Romney is a Mormon there are social positions that he takes that those who are Christians agree with, such as Mitt Romney has said he will protect the sanctity of marriage, he does protect freedom of religion, things like that. Because we do know that at the end of the day this same-sex marriage thing is all about our maintaining the right to practice our religion the way we have been practicing it because if those on the other side had their way I think that where it’s headed is if all the laws were overturned churches could possibly, their 501c3 status could be challenged if they didn’t allow members of the same-sex to use their sanctuary to perform weddings and no true man of God will allow that.
If any platform, if you look at the two platforms and as you said in your opening this show doesn’t support the Republican Party or the Democratic Party, but of the two platforms only one platform actively supports evil. Abortion is evil. Same-sex marriage, the greatest oxymoron that I know, is evil. Those who are trying to redefine marriage, that is an evil endeavor. The Bible says let God be true and every man a liar, now when Christians line up behind anyone whether they’re black or white who are promoting evil, then they are sowing to the flesh and they’re going to reap corruption, they are sowing to the wind and they’re going to reap the whirlwind.
During an interview with Focus on the Family president Jim Daly, Paul Ryan reassured the anti-gay group that a Romney-Ryan administration will fiercely oppose gay rights. Focus on the Family and its founder James Dobson have a long history of promoting anti-gay policies and ex-gay therapy, and earned a shout-out from Romney earlier this week while campaigning in Colorado, where it is headquartered.
While Romney has moved in his career from backing gay rights to becoming a vocal foe, Ryan has a solidly anti-gay voting record in Congress. Ryan told Daly, whose political arm has been spending money on behalf of Romney and a number of other Republican candidates like Todd Akin, that the ticket is firmly against same-sex marriage and that he was a “big supporter” of a 2006 amendment which enshrined marriage discrimination into the Wisconsin state constitution. He also said the Obama administration’s decision not to defend the unconstitutional Defense of Marriage Act hurt the “rule of law” and “contradicts our system of government,” however, a number of presidents including George W. Bush have not defended statutes they deemed unconstitutional.
Daly: Focus on the Family has been behind the scenes working for years to defend marriage and to speak out for marriage and the importance of marriage. I think thirty-two out of thirty-two states where we have helped put a ballot initiative or some other mechanism in front of the people, we have won that thirty-two out of thirty-two times. It seems like when it’s in front of the people they vote for it, if it’s the state-level judges they will try to do it by fiat or if it is simply some other mechanism, the State House passes it without the vote of the people. For the Romney-Ryan ticket, when you look at marriage, what do we need to do in the culture to lift up and strengthen the very core building block of society and that’s family.
Ryan: It’s the foundation for society and for family for thousands of years. First of all, Mitt Romney and I — I’ll just say it, it’s worth repeating — we believe marriage is between one man and one woman, that’s number one. Number two, you know where I come from we had one of those amendments in Wisconsin, I was a big supporter of it and we passed it like you say, where it’s put on the ballot it passes. The second point is, President Obama gave up defending the Defense of Marriage Act in the courts, I mean, not only is this decision to abandon this law the wrong decision, it passed in a bipartisan manner, it is very troubling because it undermines not only traditional marriage but it contradicts our system of government. It’s not the president’s job to pick and choose which laws he likes. A Romney administration will protect traditional marriage and the rule of law and we will provide the Defense of Marriage Act the proper defense in the courts that it deserves.
The Southern Baptist Convention’s top ethicist and resident plagiarist Richard Land is offering a completely original idea that he hopes will end the debate over same-sex marriage once and for all! In his column, What Relationships Should Be Called Marriage: A Modest Proposal, Land proposes that gay couples should be barred from marrying but instead be treated the same way as “two maiden or widowed sisters who were living together or a mother and a devoted son or daughter who were living together in a platonic relationship.”
Marriage has been defined in Western civilization for at least two millennia now as being a sexual relationship between one man and one woman. Christianity has defined it so historically, most often coupling it with life-long permanence and monogamy. As an Evangelical Christian, I certainly embrace that definition.
However, how do we deal with those who would choose to extend some of the legal privileges our society has accorded marriage to same-sex relationships without shattering the definition of marriage or discriminating against people outside the heterosexual definition of marriage? How do we protect society against those who would extend the special status of marriage to homosexual, lesbian or polygamous relationships? How do we protect time-honored titles, like "husband" and "wife," from being attacked as homophobic or sexist terms to be replaced by spouse #1 and spouse #2 or "Mom" and "Dad" from being reduced legally to caregiver #1 and caregiver #2? Such legal assaults on these time-honored family terms seem inevitable if "same-sex" marriage becomes equal with heterosexual marriage.
I propose that as Americans we declare heterosexual marriage as the only relationship in our society that is to be defined by its sexual nature and that it will continue to be defined as a legal relationship between one man and one woman consummated by sexual intercourse.
If two men or two women are living together in a relationship and they want to ask the state legislature in their state to grant some of the special legal privileges accorded marriage to their relationship the state legislature should respond in the following fashion: "We will consider your request, but the sexual nature of your relationship will be irrelevant to our discussions because marriage is the only relationship in our society that is defined by its sexual nature. Why should other people who are living in committed relationships that do not involve sexual activity be discriminated against or left out?"
In other words, the state legislature would not discriminate against two maiden or widowed sisters who were living together or a mother and a devoted son or daughter who were living together in a platonic relationship. Why should such households and relationships be left behind when legal privileges and recognition are being passed out just because they are not in a sexual relationship?
Trying to boost his campaign to generate a voter rebellion against Democrats over the issue of marriage equality, Harry Jackson wrote in his column today that legalizing same-sex marriage would harm children. He asserts that gay couples who seek to become parents “put their own fleeting desires ahead of the God-given rights of their children,” whose children he says are more likely to be gay, depressed, unemployed or drug users. Jackson cited the work of Walter Schumm of Kansas State University to back up his claims, but Schumm’s work has been roundly criticized and he is closely tied to anti-gay crackpot Paul Cameron of the Family Research Institute. Later, Jackson mentioned the notorious Mark Regnerus study as part of his warning against gay parenting. What Jackson fails to mention, however, is that even the journal that published his report recently admitted that it was severely flawed, noting that just two of the respondents actually “lived with a lesbian couple for their entire childhoods, and most did not live with lesbian or gay parents for long periods, if at all.”
The reason that legally defined marriage is important is because of children. It takes a mother and a father to conceive a child, and children have a God-given right to have a relationship with both their biological mother and their biological father. Children also have a God-given right to have both a male role model and a female role model in their homes. There are certainly times when tragedy takes a parent from a child, but what about the much more frequent times when adults put their own fleeting desires ahead of the God-given rights of their children? Desires change, as the breakups of both heterosexual and homosexual relationships testify.
As our nation continues to wrestle with the meaning and precise definition of marriage Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered activists consistently dismiss the issue of children. Same-sex marriage advocates insist that children of homosexual couples have the same or better outcomes than children of heterosexual couples. Unfortunately for them these assertions are based more on philosophy than hard science. For example, a 2010 study by Dr. Walter Schumm of Kansas State University confirmed that adult children raised by homosexual couples are (unsurprisingly) two to five times as likely to identify themselves as homosexual as children of heterosexuals. But the nation is divided as to whether that is an important outcome or not.
More specifically, whenever the topic of children reared by gay parents is raised: the assertion is made that there are no special problems or disadvantages because of their parents’ choices of “partners.” But this image (if remotely true) represents a tiny, disproportionately wealthy fraction of the gay population. Most of the scientists who have researched the children of such families admit as much.
Common sense would remind us that the results of any particular study depends both on how one defines a household headed by an LGBT couple, and what factors one evaluates when looking at “outcomes.” Dr. Mark Regnerus of the University of Texas, Austin, recently set out to hear the stories of the adults living in America today who were raised by parents in homosexual relationships. LGBT activists have fought vigorously to malign and suppress his findings. In short, he learned that, on 25 of 40 different outcomes evaluated, the children of women who’ve had same-sex relationships fare quite differently than those in stable, biologically-intact mom-and-pop families, displaying numbers more comparable to those from heterosexual stepfamilies and single parents.
This study included controls for age, race, gender, and the impact of being bullied as a youth, or the gay-friendliness of the state in which they live. Yet the respondents of same-sex parents were more apt to become unemployed, be less healthy and more depressed. They also were more likely to have cheated on a spouse or partner, have more male and female sex partners, experience more sexual victimization, and were more likely to reflect negatively on their childhood family life. Those raised by same-sex couples also were more likely to smoke marijuana and have trouble with the law.
At this point in our nation, no one is debating the right of consenting adults to do what they wish with each other in private. But redefining the ancient institution of marriage is an entirely different matter. This will set the stage for more and more children to grow up without a mother or a father, simply to placate the desire of adults. We must fight to preserve the traditional definition of marriage for the sake of these children.
After spending months attacking President Obama over his stance on gay rights and telling African American voters to stop supporting Obama in order to punish him for favoring marriage equality, William Owens of the Coalition of African-American Pastors told the Christian Post that he thinks it’s “ridiculous” for the marriage issue to dominate political debate. “We have more problems than any other group and here we are taking about gay marriage,” Owens said. “It is ridiculous.”
Owens, a liaison for the National Organization for Marriage, was quoted in an article where one pastor warned that the use of “the civil rights struggle to promote the sexual appetites of the homosexual agenda is an affront to the dignity of black people” and where the author described black Christians as conflicted over whether to support Obama due to his “surprise announcement in late May that he now supports same-sex marriage.” What the article fails to mention, however, is that the latest polling shows Obama leading Romney among black voters by an overwhelming 94-0 percent.
On the front burner is President Obama's surprise announcement in late May that he now supports same-sex marriage. While he solidified his support among liberals, many black voters viewed the issue in a different light. Even more so than some traditionally white conservative denominations such as the Southern Baptist Convention, predominately black churches have long held that homosexuality and specifically same-sex marriage, is a sin.
Plus, the language that gay activists use in comparing the fight for what they term "marriage equality" to the struggle for civil rights in the 1950s and 60s is insulting to many who marched along Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. in Selma and other places.
"Using the civil rights struggle to promote the sexual appetites of the homosexual agenda is an affront to the dignity of black people," Dr. J.M. Hunter of told The Christian Post. "No other group in America has had to suffer the wicked injustices as did African blacks who were forced to provide hard labor with no compensation, and their American descendants."
During the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte two weeks ago, a group of black clergy calling themselves the Coalition of African-American Pastors held another in a series of press conferences to call on black Christians to withhold their support from President Obama until at a minimum, he agrees to meet with the group to justify his support for same-sex marriage.
Asked if the White House has answered his initial request for the meeting first made in mid-summer, the group's leader, the Rev. Bill Owens, was quick to reply. "Not a word, not a single word," he told a group of reporters in Charlotte.
Owens, who marched for civil rights in Nashville and Memphis in the 1960s said he believes the Democratic Party has taken the black vote for granted and that the National Association for the Advancement of Color People is simply just a puppet of Democratic Party leaders.
"At a minimum black Christians should think for themselves and vote for the person that best represents their beliefs," said Owens. "We have more problems than any other group and here we are taking about gay marriage. It is ridiculous."
Before telling attendees of the Values Voter Summit about her “sexual rampage” as part of an attack on Sandra Fluke and the contraception coverage mandate, right-wing activist Star Parker sat down with Buster Wilson of the American Family Association to knock the Republican Party for not being anti-gay enough. While Paul Ryan is a vehement opponent of gay rights, Wilson and Parker were upset that Ryan did not speak in depth about his stance against marriage equality at a time when Democrats are campaigning on the issue.
Parker offered a stern warning to the GOP: speak out against same-sex marriage or lose God’s blessing. Parker, who interviewed Ryan for her own show, expressed disappointment in his speech and said that she was “not confident that God is going to shine down upon the party of Lincoln, the party of Reagan, while we are running away from the very core issues that birthed us as a party.” In fact, Parker even likened the fight over marriage equality to the debate over slavery.
Wilson: One of the things that Paul Ryan did not speak of in his speech today was the issue of marriage, it seemed like once again ‘it’s the economy stupid’ with this campaign and we’ve done everything we can do to shy away from any of the social issues, in particular marriage. But not the Democrats, it seemed like everybody that spoke at the Democratic Convention brought up the fact that they were the party for abortion and gay marriage and gay rights. Why do you think the conservatives that are—let me rephrase this— why do you think the Romney campaign seems to want to shy away from those issues as much as he does.
Parker: Because the Republican Party is a political party, when you think about the social environment, if you think about the social issues, they demand us to talk about morality and I think that the Republican Party has made the decision that they don’t want to. The challenge before them, however, is that this election is about choosing who we are going to serve. According to the Scripture, God said I’d laid life and death before you, good and evil before you, those are defining topics. As you just mentioned, Democrats have made it clear who they are and they are going to make sure that we define ourselves. So it is unfortunate that even though Romney and the Republicans have decided that we are not going to define ourselves and that now Paul Ryan has not done that here at the Values Voter Summit. I do not know who prepared his remarks for him, I love him, I’ve known him since he came to Washington, D.C., I am very hopeful that his star will consider to shine. But I am just not confident that God is going to shine down upon the party of Lincoln, the party of Reagan, while we are running away from the very core issues that birthed us as a party. We are at that critical cross point, similar to the 1850s; we cannot go on like this half-free and half-slave. We are going to have to do what Abraham Lincoln did and that’s reach into the Scripture and say ‘a house divided against itself can’t stand.’
A few years ago, anti-gay activist Harry Jackson claimed that he had moved from Maryland into the District of Columbia in order to lead an unsuccessful campaign against marriage equality in the District. Jackson’s legal residency was the topic of much debate at the time; Jackson signed an affidavit affirming his DC residency. But now, Jackson is supporting an anti-marriage equality campaign in Maryland. Will he be eligible to vote against marriage equality in Maryland? At the Values Voter Summit this past weekend, Jackson bragged that he had ordained and pastored Derek McCoy, who directs the Maryland Marriage Alliance and asked VVS attendees for financial support. Jackson, in a workshop promoting his own campaign to use marriage as a wedge issue against Obama and other Democrats in seven swing states, caught himself when talking about the struggle over marriage in Maryland. “I live in – have a church in that state,” he said.
William Owens Jr., whose father William Owens works for the National Organization for Marriage and runs the right-wing Coalition of African-American Pastors, is out with a new article suggesting that President Obama is preparing for a dictatorship and may even be a Muslim. He charges that the “anti-American” Obama wants to “render America decrepit and ripe for a dictatorial-style second four-year term” and to do this the Democrats must do away with God: “The God of the Bible has been rejected by this party as they have welcomed the god of another. With a record increase of Muslims in attendance, the message is clear and President Obama has raised the stakes for the fight for America by throwing in all the chips.”
Owens Jr. also claimed that Obama, simply by personally endorsing marriage equality, intends to “pass laws that would threaten to jail and/or fine pastors who didn’t perform” same-sex nuptials because he “believes pastors to be homophobic and is committed to punishing such thoughts by law” and wants to “destroy the family – by doing away with it.”
“The trajectory of Obama is leading to a tragedy of untold proportions and in less than 60 days,” he writes, “if we don't remove him, I'm afraid that tragedy is set for America.”
The trajectory of Obama's ideology has finally arrived at its dark destination … a godless America, a family-less America, and an un-American America.
Since Obama has taken the White House, he has been effective in his quest to fundamentally change the course of America. He realizes this is not possible unless he removes the fundamentals of America: God, family and country, even if it means going against the wishes of most Americans, which he has done with disdain and contempt.
In 2008, Obama started his first days as president with a world tour apologizing for America's exceptionalism in hopes of propping up other countries by putting America down. He relished the opportunity to vent a well-fostered resentment for the country that voted him in as president. A people who fall prey to both Black pride and white guilt became victims of his twisted ideology. Americans did not expect a president would use the sacred office to dislodge their country with a methodology that smells of corruption, deception and apostasy.
You may kiss the bride," says the pastor as two people of the same sex lean over to kiss each other inside a Bible-believing church. Why? Because Obama's endorsement of same-sex marriage would pass laws that would threaten to jail and/or fine pastors who didn't perform these unions among a group that accounts for less than 2% of the American population. He believes pastors to be homophobic and is committed to punishing such thoughts by law. It is a fact that most Americans, regardless of their religious beliefs, view marriage as being between ONE man and ONE woman. This is how he has purposed to destroy the family – by doing away with it.
It is not Obama's concerns for the homosexual that has prompted him to support same-sex marriage. It is for the vote and the moneybag. Obama is a master at using individuals as well as groups to accomplish his objective, and if it means taking anti-American positions, he will do it. If it means falsifying genuine concern for a group of people to attain their money and their vote, he will do it. How do I know? It's a reality. Just ask Black Americans. Ask Jeremiah Wright. To render America decrepit and ripe for a dictatorial-style second four-year term, Obama must show just who he is and rally to himself two type of supporters: those who get it and love it, and those who don't have a clue and love it any way.
The God of the Bible has been rejected by this party as they have welcomed the god of another. With a record increase of Muslims in attendance, the message is clear and President Obama has raised the stakes for the fight for America by throwing in all the chips.
More than Obama, however, we Americans, evangelicals and pastors of the Judeo-Christian faith have become passive and have not fulfilled our duty to defend our faith and to speak the truth.
The trajectory of Obama is leading to a tragedy of untold proportions and in less than 60 days, if we don't remove him, I'm afraid that tragedy is set for America.
Only God, whom the Democratic Party has rejected, can and will save America. Unless those who believe and honor this God, of which much of America was founded and arise in His name, many believe America's real hope is lost.
It's really not about what Obama will do; it's about what most Americans won't do: stand up for our Freedoms and Liberties given by God not by a man nor by President Obama himself.
In a radio bulletin that either reveals a stunning level of ignorance or sheer insanity, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins said that the National Organization for Marriage’s campaign to boycott Starbucks over its stance on gay rights called “Dump Starbucks”—which so far has collected fewer than 50,000 signers—is responsible for a $10 billion reduction in market capitalization. “Siding with radical homosexuals has its price in this country,” Perkins said. “And in Starbucks case, the cost is about ten billion dollars.”
That’s right, the FRC chief says that the company’s decision to endorse marriage equality in its home state led to its recent troubles, while providing no evidence as to how NOM and its fewer than 50,000 fellow boycotters contributed to Starbucks’ drop in stock value.
It didn’t take long for Starbucks to lose bucks over marriage. Hello, I’m Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council in Washington. In January, Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz said endorsing same-sex marriage would be good for business. Boy was he wrong! Siding with radical homosexuals has its price in this country. And in Starbucks case, the cost is about ten billion dollars. That’s how much the coffee giant’s lost in stock value since the campaign to Dump Starbucks got underway. In the last eight months, the company's missed sales projections and watched stocks dive from $61 to $48, for a loss of more than $10.2 billion. How many companies will fall for the lie that endorsing same-sex marriage will help business? J.C. Penney’s tried it. Target’s tried it. Now Starbucks. And every time, there’s a reason to believe that alienating millions of customers will directly affect a company’s bottom line. On the flip side, look at Chick-fil-A. They found out that supporting traditional values pays just as many cultural dividends as financial ones.
Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly yesterday spoke to the American Family Association’s Sandy Rios to denounce the Democratic National Platform’s support for reproductive freedom and marriage equality. According to Schlafly, “the feminists completely control the Obama administration” and “whatever the feminists want, the feminists get,” including endorsements of abortion rights and same-sex marriage. There is “support of everything the feminists want,” Schlafly lamented, “It’s a very destructive force in our society.”
Rios: According to the platform, there is no place for politicians or the government to get in the way of abortions, so they’re saying that abortion—
Schlafly: Sandy, let me explain. The feminists completely control the Obama administration. Valerie [Jarrett] is considered the most powerful person in the country. Whatever the feminists want, the feminists get. That’s why we’re getting support of abortion by the Obama administration, and paying for it, forcing is to pay for it, which is what they want, and support of same-sex marriage, and support of everything the feminists want. It’s a very destructive force in our society.
Rios: It’s certainly not a forward movement, it’s a backward movement, I think.
Schlafly even claimed that progressives want people “to look to the government for everything,” unlike during the Great Depression when “we didn’t look to the government for any solution and they didn’t give us any solution and we grew up to be the greatest generation.” While Schlafly denies that the government didn’t play a role in ending the Great Depression, she appears to forget that there was significant government intervention through the New Deal and other government-driven programs to stimulate the sluggish economy:
Rios: You know Phyllis just philosophically, this is what the left always says, they always say that conservatives are old fashioned, they mock the old sitcoms you know where they had separate beds, twin beds, they mock the sitcoms of the 50s, the Andy Griffith’s, the Dick Van Dyke’s, they think that’s funny and amusing and to be progressive, to be modern, to be in-this-decade—the Constitution is old and outdated too, by the way, that’s what they think—they always make that argument that to be forward moving is to throw off any of the constraints of the past. Can you just from your perspective of life, why would we hang on to boundaries, regulations and rules from the past? Isn’t this a new day?
Schlafly: Because they work. Our Constitution has lasted over two centuries; no other country’s has done that. When our borders are open people want to come in, they’re not trying to get out, I think that’s a pretty good test of whether a country is successful or not. We built a great country of great prosperity and enormous freedom and some people don’t like that, they want to look to the government for everything. I grew up during the Great Depression, we didn’t look to the government for any solution and they didn’t give us any solution and we grew up to be the greatest generation.
After claiming to take an exit from anti-gay advocacy, Scott Lively now says that anti-gay activists aren’t working hard enough. In a WorldNetDaily column, the activist who urged Uganda to imprison gays who refuse sexual orientation conversion therapy and blames the Holocaust on gay people said that the anti-gay movement has been too nice and must now bring out “angry crowds with tar and feathers in hand” to intimidate officials who back “gay fascism bills,” or anti-discrimination measures. Lively offered to lecture about how gays are responsible for the Holocaust and advocate the “recruitment of children into a homosexual identity” in order to help turn an anti-gay “snowball” into an “avalanche.”
Now we know that when the leftists attempt to push a “gay fascism bill” in politically conservative areas, our response must be to create controversy to draw public attention to the bill so that the people wake up and realize there’s a problem. Throw out the old playbook of acting nice and trying to persuade the public officials through reason. They think they are smarter than you all anyhow and have already made up their minds. They need to see angry crowds with tar and feathers in hand coming to run them out of office! Indeed, the Mayor of Springfield complained to the media that he was extremely bothered by threats of recall by the citizens.
If you find out there’s a “gay fascism bill” coming to your conservative town and need help exposing it to the public, just give me a call and I’ll come to help. Invite me to give a speech on my book “The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party” or address the global threat of homosexuality – or to give a give a sermon or lecture on ANY aspect of the homosexual issue. When they hear I’m coming to town every left-wing fanatic for miles around will start wailing and gnashing their teeth, and normal people will start popping their heads up to see what’s going on. Once that snowball of public controversy starts down the hill it takes very little effort to keep it rolling till it smashes right through the doors of city hall like an avalanche.
Friends, I believe the worm has begun to turn and the backlash against the fascistic “gay” agenda has finally started. As Christians we need to steward this process and keep it civil and positive. Our goal is not merely to stop their agenda, it is to advance our own: a genuinely family-friendly society grounded in healthy biblical values. To that end, it is time for our side to begin showing the contrast in clear unequivocal terms. We need to expose every aspect of the homosexual lifestyle and agenda to public scrutiny and at the same time remind everyone that God’s plan for sex and marriage produces as much good and health as “sexual freedom” produces harm and disease.
Last week’s vindication by the University of Texas at Austin of the Mark Regnerus’ study exposing the dangers of “gay” parenting is both another sign of the worm’s turn and a tool for every pro-family advocate to use.
Likewise, the choice of the Center for Marriage Policy to come against “gay marriage” on the grounds of public health, talking again about the diseases associated with homosexual conduct, is a very smart move. They have declared September “Protect Marriage Month” and are circulating a flyer detailing the many health risks of homosexuality. We need to bring back public discussion of AIDS as a “gay” disease, pederasty as major subculture of male homosexuality, mental health problems and domestic violence as major problems associated with lesbianism, the increasing recruitment of children into a homosexual identity through experimentation with “gay” sex, etc. – all the truths we stopped telling because the other side screamed so loudly about them.
Now is the time to step out from the behind the defensive bulwark of “traditional marriage” in which our only argument is that “marriage is between a man and a woman.” It is time to start taking back some of the ground we have ceded to the other side in the face of their overwhelming public-relations superiority. Their marketing strategy to cast homosexuality as benign and even socially beneficial has finally hit the brick wall of reality. The phony facade is beginning to crack and crumble like an eggshell does when a baby chick is ready to be born.
Lively gladly cites the recent report of the far-right Center for Marriage Policy, which declared September “Protecting Marriage Month” and in a flyer [PDF] calls homosexuality a “sexual disorder” and “perversion.”
Corporations promoting the gay lifestyle do their employees and the Nation a great disservice. Those who truly care about ending the AIDS crisis, saving others and our children from death or disability must focus on policy encouraging treatment and counseling for those caught up in a promiscuous lifestyle.
The fact that promiscuity is “normal” to the gay lifestyle indicates that it likely reflects a sexual disorder. Most homosexuals also sleep with the opposite sex, possibly infecting innocent wives, husbands, and children with HIV and other serious or untreatable infections.
Sexual perversion is not a discovery of science. It is the work of the sexual liberation movement. Their political agenda depends on us believing that sexual promiscuity and risky behaviors are normal and somehow worthy of being elevated to the status of genuine marriage.
We disagree with the sexual revolution. Science has proven that homosexuality is a harmful behavior which is dangerous to others and our children.
By protecting Marriage and encouraging homosexuals to turn the corner to live healthy lives, we share love and life with everyone.
We do not give smokers or illegal drug users special rights. We must discourage homosexuality and encourage therapy to save lives and protect the rest of America.
Every month or so Washington Times columnist Jeffrey Kuhner appears on The Janet Mefferd Show to deliver an incoherent, unhinged rant about the news of the day, and yesterday was no different as he told Mefferd that the “radical secular liberals” who purportedly control the Democratic Party are out to “entrench radical feminism” and “break the back of Christian America” through same-sex marriage and legal abortion.
I think that the Democrats, somebody like Obama, you just have a ‘D’ after their name, they will get 43, 44, 45 percent of the vote automatically. Why? Since the 1960s, this country has been engulfed in a major culture war and what you’re seeing now is the growing rift between liberal America and conservative America, red state America and blue state America, secular America and Christian America. What is now clear is there is an ideological and cultural war for the heart and soul of this country and the Democratic Party, especially since 1972, has been essentially hijacked, it has become hostage, to the radical secular liberals of the 1960s and they are bent on a social revolution. That is why you will not see any pro-life Democrats speak at the DNC; it is why they’ve been purging the party systematically of people who are opposed to abortion or people who support traditional family values; that is why the Democrats have now embraced gay marriage; it’s why Obamacare has federal funding for abortion; it’s why now they are making free birth control, government-subsidized contraception, now almost a civil right, a human right for women. This is an attempt to entrench radical feminism, this is an attempt to break the back of Christian America.
Kuhner also questioned whether Vice President Joe Biden is “literally mentally insane” for making his poorly-phrased “chains” comment, which was referring to Republican plans that would punish consumers in order to help Wall Street, and claimed that the real “extremists” are those who support reproductive rights and marriage equality. He even slammed Obama for using an “assassination list” to kill people “they deem to be terrorists.”
Now, you have to ask yourself this question, either Joe Biden is literally mentally insane, he’s living in the century, he literally is so crazy, so detached from reality that he honestly believes that Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney are going to re-impose slavery, or he is a complete liar, a complete smear merchant who is willing to lie, say and do anything, even inflame racial tensions, even fan the flames of racial hatred and division to get re-elected. Either way the man is a complete extremist, he’s a complete race-baiter, a complete fear-monger, and then you add the list of all the other crazy comments that he said going back 20 years and you have to ask yourself: how is it a man who supports abortion on demand, who believes in the fundamental transformation of the most basic institution of society—marriage, an institution that has been defined as between a man and a woman going back thousands of years in every culture, in every age, in every major civilization—and I have to ask this question: the Republicans are extremists? Conservatives are extremists? Christians are extremists? This is the same man Joe Biden, who along with Barack Obama, have an assassination list where they look over people that they deem to be terrorists and say ‘let’s kill ‘em.’
William Owens of the Coalition of African-American Pastors, which is not so much a real coalition as it is a right-wing front group, appeared on WallBuilders Live today with David Barton and Rick Green to denounce President Obama for endorsing same-sex marriage. The virulently anti-gay pastor once again compared his political activism to that of Martin Luther King, Jr., agreeing with Green’s suggestion that he is “taking the same stance Martin Luther King, Jr. would.” Owens also reiterated his claim that he was a civil rights figure, despite little evidence of his role in the movement.
He claimed that Obama’s approach to the black community is “not acceptable” following his endorsement of marriage equality and decision to lead America “down a very immoral road,” and doubted that Obama “even believes it himself, but because of the money and catering to the homosexual community” he took the pro-equality stance anyway. To top it all off, Owens said that “my people in Africa killed each other by the thousands so we can’t give him a pass because he’s black.”
Green: So why is this an important enough issue for ya’ll to move forward like this?
Owens: I think it’s important because it’s changing our culture and we feel that the President, being the first black president number one, holding the most powerful position in the world was put their overwhelmingly by black people. I was in the civil rights movement and we marched for civil rights but it was not for a man to marry a man and a woman to marry a woman, and the President has not given us the courtesy of even answering our request. That is improper, it’s disrespect. You cannot ignore that many pastors and their members and cater to the homosexual community, he’s had Lady Gaga in the White House, he gave same-sex marriage a party in the White House, but to ignore thousands of pastors and their members is not acceptable and we will not give him a pass because he’s black.
Green: You know you said something I think is just absolutely correct; you said ‘by embracing same-sex marriage President Obama is leading this country down an immoral path’ and ‘some things are bigger than the next election’ and you also mentioned that the black church has always been the conscience of America, I think that’s absolutely true. To see this stance, being willing to say we may agree with the President on a ton of other issues but this one is just too big, we cannot stand by and allow him to lead us down this immoral path is a courageous stance. How are people responding to you?
Owens: We almost have that 100,000 signatures, believe it or not, and they are responding daily, sometimes three or four hits a minute, supporting our position. As you know, every state that the marriage amendment has been on the ballot, we have won in every state and the blacks have overwhelmingly voted against same-sex marriage in every state. So the President takes it on himself to put his ideas out there for political reasons, I don’t think he even believes it himself, but because of the money and catering to the homosexual community, well I guarantee you the homosexual community doesn’t have as many people as there are Christians, black and white and all colors. I think he’s put himself in a corner, I don’t think he expected us to come out against him so hard because he’s black, but we’re not giving him a pass because he’s black, he’s leading the country down a very immoral road that it will take years to know the ramifications.
Green: It sounds like you’re taking the same stance Martin Luther King, Jr. would, it’s not the color of his skin but the content of character and what are the actual positions.
Owens: That’s right. We can’t give him a pass because he’s black. My people in Africa killed each other by the thousands so we can’t give him a pass because he’s black. Being black does not make him any more honorable, in this case as far as I’m concerned it’s making him less honorable. He was the first black president and this is what he uses his power for.