Last week, Kevin Swanson and Dave Buehner of Generations Radio finally got wind of the pope’s declaration that he won’t “judge” gay priests and Bishop Desmond Tutu’s remarks that he would rather go to hell than “a homophobic heaven.”
Naturally, the two were outraged. Reacting to the pope’s comments, Swanson lamented, “’Gay’ used to mean happy – you know, blessed, happy, rejoicing, rejoicing in the lord – not sort of lustful, licentious, focused on decadent sexuality.”
To which Buehner replied with what he himself described as “a low blow.”
“You know the song, ‘Deck the halls with boughs of holly’? You know that line, ‘Don we now our gay apparel’? Have you seen the pope’s dress?”
Later in the program, the two discussed Bishop Tutu’s support for gay rights, which Buehner said indicates that “Desmond Tutu probably doesn’t like Jesus very much, in fact he hates Jesus.”
“However,” Buehner added, referring to the famous Christ the Redeemer statue that towers over Rio de Janeiro, “He’s probably good with Jesús, the drug lord from Bolivia, or the big drug lord from Rio De Janeiro that’s got his hands out, remember that guy?”
“Ex-gay” activist Anne Paulk (ex-wife of ex-ex-gay activist John Paulk) joined Janet Parshall yesterday to discuss the “way out of homosexuality.” Paulk, who has previously claimed that the majority of lesbians were sexually abused as children, told Parshall that “the reason most people end up gay is because they’ve had some really broken experiences in their early childhood” and that they are “acting out in this way” in response to “sorrow and pain.”
This “expression of sin,” she added, is “really not that much different” than alcoholism, drug abuse and “relational addiction.”
I do believe that if the Church understood that it’s the outcome of pain and sorrow and interpersonal challenges, and it’s the product of personal confusion. And that’s what I used to talk on all the time in years prior, is you know what, the reason why most people end up gay is because they’ve had some really broken experiences in their early childhood. It’s just manifesting in this way. And the more you get to know about what’s underlying of homosexuality, the more you get to understand that they’re just a human being that’s been wounded. That’s a little boy who’s grown up, who’s been very desperately hurt and is acting out in this way. That’s still, that was once a little girl whose heart was broken and her body misused. And the outcome is sorrow and pain, and this is the expression of it.
And I think that’s the expression of sin altogether, and it’s our rebellion against God, our rebellion against -- what we believe we want our way to be. Homosexuality is, not unlike any other sin, it’s a shortcut to getting your own needs met, and it’s not a healthy shortcut. Drugs don’t solve the problem of trying to hide from one’s trouble. Hiding doesn’t work at all. Alcohol doesn’t work that way, relational addiction doesn’t work that way, promiscuity doesn’t solve anything. Same thing with homosexuality. And I think when people understand that they’re really not that much different, it’s just a different outworking of similar underlying issues, it helps a lot.
But, like Sandy Rios, who takes heart in the fact that gay people sometimes get their hearts broken, Paulk has hope for gays and lesbians. “Even people in the gay community will celebrate someone’s amazing marriage, like the prince and the princess of England,” she said, meaning that they are in fact capable of understanding “the big picture of beauty that God has in mind.”
American Family Radio host Sandy Rios dedicated a long chunk of her program yesterday to responding to the widespread attention to her recent comparison of gay couple’s love to the “love” Cleveland kidnapper Ariel Castro claimed he had for his prisoners.
Rios claimed she had been deliberately misunderstood, but then proceeded to repeat her claims in detail. She finally spoke directly to those who monitor her program, thanking us for finding her a wider audience and declaring, “I stand by what we say…As unfortunate and uncomfortable, heartbreaking, irrational that seems to some of you that are so steeped in the homosexual lifestyle, you’re steeped in popular culture, it’s still the truth.”
Rios then went on to deliver a direct message to the LGBT people who were offended by her comments, saying that the fact that people were upset proves that she was telling the truth. “If what we’re saying is not true, it should have no power over you,” she said.
But Rios has hope for gay people. She assured her listeners that gay people are “capable of great love” because she sees the “tremendous heartbreak in the homosexual community,” where “there aren’t many lasting relationships – maybe among lesbians, but certainly not among gay men.”
All this heartbreak, Rios concludes, shows that gay people could achieve “the right kind of love” – that is, opposite-sex marriage – if they just tried.
If what we’re saying is not true, it should have no power over you, it shouldn’t bother you. Because I think in time, what’s true and what’s right, what works, what comports with reality will be lasting. So, let’s just see if your view of this is lasting. Let’s just see if homosexual marriage is all that you think it is, if it’s a pure and wonderful expression of love for two people.
Now, I would never say that homosexuals cannot love. They can, of course. Capable of great love. And I know there’s been tremendous heartbreak in the homosexual community – and I’ve talked about this before – heartbreak when you lose a loved one, heartbreak when you break up. Because, you know, there aren’t many lasting relationships – maybe among lesbians, but certainly not among gay men, that’s not the norm.
So, there’s a lot of heartbreak, a lot of rejection when you get older, so I know that you’re capable and able. You’re humans, you love. The point is, the right kind of love. The right kind of love is life-giving. And the right kind of love is love for God, love for your natural family, love between a man and a woman and a woman and a man in marriage. Not cohabitating. There’s just some standards that God lays down.
Mission America’s Linda Harvey dedicated her program this morning to LGBT-inclusive nondiscrimination laws, which she claims are in fact “all about discrimination” and “create a climate of suspicion, spite and revenge.”
“If you disagree about being required to respect homosexuality -- however these folks want to define respect -- at work, at school, at the pool or at the playground, you may find yourself the victim of this unrelenting agenda,” she warned.
Eagle Forum founder and anti-gay activist Phyllis Schlafly was “extremely offended” by the Supreme Court’s ruling striking down a key part of the Defense of Marriage Act, because of “all the nasty names” she claims the court’s majority called DOMA’s proponents.
Speaking with Steve Deace yesterday, Schlafly said that it was “inappropriate, unprecedented and really nasty” for Justice Anthony Kennedy to find that DOMA’s passage had anything to do with “animus against gays.”
“I feel personally insulted by what Justice Kennedy said,” she added.
Deace: You wrote an interesting reaction to the US Supreme Court, I guess we would call it ‘opinion,’ but it really looked to me, Phyllis, like five justices, and Anthony Kennedy in particular, chose to write what amounts to an anti-Christian polemic disguised as a legal opinion. And it seems like you sort of got the same vibe from what they wrote.Schlafly: Well, I was extremely offended at all the nasty names he called us. I just think it’s so inappropriate, unprecedented and really nasty for the justice to say that the reason DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act, was passed, and those who stand up for traditional marriage is that they have animus against gays, they want to deny them equal dignity, that we want to brand them as unworthy, we want to humiliate their children, we have a hateful desire to harm a politically unpopular group. I just think, I feel personally insulted by what Justice Kennedy said. I don’t think that’s true, the idea that anybody who stood up for traditional marriage is guilty of all that hate in his heart is just outrageous.
Later in the interview, the two discussed Hobby Lobby’s suit against the health care law’s mandate that they provide their employees with insurance that includes birth control coverage. Deace claimed that the Obama administration is making “a clear attempt to eradicate the worldview that stands in opposition to statism.”
Schlafly agreed: “Well, I think you’re right, and that’s why I think Obama is definitely trying to make this a totally secular country where you’re not permitted to reference God in anything that anybody else can hear.”
It goes without saying that if the president is trying to eliminate public references to God, he’s doing a very poor job of it.
Deace: Well, and I think you look at something like religious freedom, you’ve got the Obama regime trying to tell companies like Hobby Lobby that your freedom of religion, when you walk into corporate headquarters there at Hobby Lobby, you no longer have the freedom of religion. So you have to do what we tell you to do, even if it violates the moral conscience of your religion, the Bill of Rights ends when you walk into your corporate headquarters. What we see going on in the US Military, for example. We’re seeing unprecedented threats to religious liberty. I know this is something you’ve written about as well. And I think this is a clear attempt to eradicate the worldview that stands in opposition to statism.
Schlafly: Well, I think you’re right, and that’s why I think Obama is definitely trying to make this a totally secular country where you’re not permitted to reference God in anything that anybody else can hear.
Pat Buchanan dedicates his latest syndicated column to New York mayoral candidate Anthony Weiner’s most recent sexting scandal, which he attempts to put into context by pointing to the moral failings of every other major New York politician. After all, Buchanan writes, one of Weiner’s main opponents in the mayoral race is Christine Quinn, “a lesbian about to marry another lesbian” (Quinn is in fact already married) and “the sitting mayor and governor are divorced and living with women not their wives.” Not only that, Buchanan says, but former mayor Rudolph Giuliani and former senator Hillary Clinton both marched in New York City gay pride parades.
Buchanan concludes that these New York political leaders, along with the decriminalization of homosexuality, indicate that Weiner is “a mainstream liberal” and that we have become “a mentally and morally sick society.”
And Weiner's conduct does seem weird, creepy, crazy.
But it was not illegal. And as it was between consenting adults, was it immoral -- by the standards of modern liberalism?
In 1973, the "Humanist Manifesto II," a moral foundation for much of American law, declared: "The many varieties of sexual exploration should not in themselves be considered 'evil.' ... Individuals should be permitted to express their sexual proclivities and pursue their lifestyles as they desire."
Is this not what Anthony was up to? Why then the indignation?
Consider how far we are along the path that liberalism equates with social and moral progress. Ronald Reagan was the first and is the only divorced and remarried man elected president.
But the front-runner in the New York mayor's race today quit Congress as a serial texter of lewd photos to anonymous women. The front-runner in the city comptroller's race was "Client No. 9" in the prostitution ring of the convicted madam who is running against him.
Weiner's strongest challenger for mayor is a lesbian about to marry another lesbian. The sitting mayor and governor are divorced and living with women not their wives. The former mayor's second wife had to go to court to stop his girlfriend from showing up at Gracie Mansion.
Weiner looks like a mainstream liberal.
Are we, possibly, a mentally and morally sick society?
Thirty year ago, homosexual acts were crimes. The Supreme Court has since discovered sodomy to be a constitutional right. State courts are discovering another new right -- of homosexuals to marry.
To call homosexuality unnatural, immoral or a mental disorder will soon constitute a hate crime in America.
Once we cast aside morality rooted in religion -- as the "Humanist Manifesto II" insists we do -- who draws the line on what is tolerable in the new dispensation.
Upon what moral ground do we stand to deny a man many wives, should he wish to leave behind many children, and the wives all consent to the arrangement? Biblically and historically, polygamy was more acceptable than homosexuality.
The second is now a constitutional right. Why not the first?
Are we not indeed headed "inevitably to utter irrationality and eventually political, as well as moral, chaos"?
Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Sen. Hillary Clinton marched in gay pride parades with the North American Man/Boy Love Association. Anyone doubt that NAMBLA will one day succeed in having the age of consent for sex between men and boys dropped into the middle or low teens?
WASHINGTON – In response to the revelation that Target Corporation gave a $50,000 donation this year to a group supporting anti-gay Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli’s gubernatorial campaign, People For the American Way President Michael Keegan released the following statement:
“This is a disappointing move from a company that vocally supports LGBT rights. Last year, Target put out a line of gay pride t-shirts and the company has gone out of its way to talk about its commitment to LGBT families. But through the Republican Governors Association, Target is supporting one of the most extreme anti-gay candidates in the country. Gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli has worked to rescind non-discrimination policies covering sexual orientation, favors turning back the clock by reinstating sodomy laws, and believes that being gay ‘brings nothing but self-destruction, not only physically but of their soul.’ If Target wants to be seen as a pro-equality company, it is going to need to rethink its contributions to groups supporting virulently anti-gay candidates.”
Back in 2010, Target Corporation was forced to apologize when it came out that it had funded campaign ads on behalf of virulently anti-gay Minnesota gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer. The controversy hit the Minnesota-based company hard, in part because it vocally supports gay rights and has a reputation as a supportive workplace for LGBT people.
But Target didn’t stop giving to anti-gay candidates. As Abe Sauer reported at the end of 2010, Target gave a total of $31,200 to anti-gay candidates in that election cycle. And now, the company is indirectly funding one of the most extreme anti-gay culture warriors in the country, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli.
Target reports that in the first half of this year, it contributed $50,000 to the Republican Governors Association, which so far this year has spent nearly $3 million on behalf of Cuccinelli’s gubernatorial campaign.
Target, like many large corporations, is an equal opportunity influence-buyer – it also gave $50,000 this year to the Democratic Governors Association, which is supporting Democratic candidate Terry McAuliffe. But its indirect funding of Cuccinelli’s campaign raises additional questions. In apologizing to his employees for the company’s contributions to Emmer’s campaign, Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel promised to launch “a strategic review and analysis of our decision-making process for financial contributions in the public policy arena” and to start “a dialogue focused on diversity and inclusion in the workplace, including GLBT issues.”
How did that “dialogue” lead to support for an organization that is dedicating itself to supporting Ken Cuccinelli? After all, Cuccinelli not only opposes advances in gay rights, he actively wants to remove protections for gays and lesbians that have already been won. Cuccinelli wants to reinstate Virginia’s “Crimes Against Nature Law,” which would outlaw oral sex between consenting adults – of any gender. In one of his first acts as attorney general, he ordered the state’s colleges and universities to rescind non-discrimination policies that covered sexual orientation. He has said that being gay “brings nothing but self-destruction, not only physically but of their souls,” and said that “homosexual acts” are “intrinsically wrong” and don’t comport with natural law.” He even disparaged gay rights activists for trying to overturn sodomy bans and push for HIV/AIDS educations in schools.
Last year, Target launched a line of t-shirts to benefit a gay rights group, declaring itself “100 percent committed to the goal of families being respected in all communities including parents who happen to be LGBT." Yet, in Cuccinelli, Target is backing a candidate who is promising to roll back the rights of LGBT people and their families in Virginia.
Update: Target spokeswoman Molly Snyder tells us:
Target’s commitment to the LGBT community is long-standing and unwavering.
We also believe strongly in our civic responsibility to engage in a bipartisan manner at the state and federal level in order to learn about public policy priorities and advocate on issues that affect our business, such as efairness legislation. One of the ways we do this is through membership in both the Democratic and Republican Governors Associations, both of which include several hundred other corporate members. When paying for our memberships, we explicitly require that our dues not be used for any individual electoral campaigns or other electioneering efforts. It would therefore be wrong and inaccurate to associate our membership dues with any particular political candidate or campaign.
It’s hard to tell how supporting an organization that says its “primary mission is to help elect Republicans to governorships throughout the nation” doesn’t amount to supporting Republican candidates for governorships.
(Washington, DC) People For the American Way Voters Alliance PAC today endorsed Carl Sciortino for Congress, praising his strong record of progressive leadership. Rep. Sciortino, currently a member of the Massachusetts House of Representatives, is running to represent Massachusetts’ fifth congressional district in the U.S. House of Representatives. The seat was recently vacated by Ed Markey on his election to the U.S. Senate.
Since his election in 2004, Carl has fought tirelessly for progressive causes. A founding member of the Massachusetts House Progressive Caucus, he has pushed for closing corporate tax loopholes, advocated for better access to transportation and healthcare, stood up for workers’ rights, and been a staunch defender of LGBT rights. The 2012 Transgender Equal Rights Bill, which Carl co-authored, provided legal protection against discrimination for transgender individuals in Massachusetts.
Before his election to the state legislature, he served as Massachusetts state director of the affiliated People For the American Way Foundation's Young Elected Officials Network.
“Carl is a strong leader, a committed public servant, and a true progressive,” said People For the American Way Voters Alliance PAC political director Randy Borntrager. “He knows that being a progressive means standing up for Americans from all walks of life; it means fighting for a woman’s right to choose, for better transportation access, for workers’ rights. And he has done all of this in Massachusetts. He has also been a real champion for LGBT rights, achieving a number of significant victories for LGBT people, including the Transgender Equal Rights Bill.
“There’s no question that Carl would defend these principles just as strongly in the U.S. Congress, where we need his powerful progressive voice more than ever. Carl will bring an unmatched dedication to progressive values to his constituents to the U.S. Congress, and we’re proud to endorse him.”
Carl Sciortino said, “We need to change the conversation in Washington and fight hard for progressive values. As a state representative, I have fought to close corporate tax loopholes, protect access to abortion clinics, and to make the economy work for regular people—not Wall Street or the big banks. In Congress, I will fight against those who put corporations over the rest of us and Tea Partiers who want to tell women what to do with their bodies.”
WTVA in Tupelo, Mississippi, reported today on a marriage equality march near the headquarters of the American Family Association. They of course asked the AFA for its view on the march, and got this response:
"The Bible calls believers to hold out God's grace to sinners. All kinds of sinners whether you are a liar or a stealer or an adulterer or a homosexual," said Patrick J. Vaughn, General Counsel for the American Family Association.
Vaughn went on to describe what he calls a very strong drive among homosexual activist to have the name marriage attached to their relationships.
"I believe that is because they think that will give them a feeling of acceptance in that what they are doing is right if they have this label [of marriage]. Unfortunately, I don't think that is going to last very long because the alienation that they sense is really an alienation because they are alienated from God. They are refusing to obey what he's commanded and they are doing something that is against the nature of the way he created them," said Vaughn.
Earlier this week, the AFA released a statement about the Mississippi marriage equality effort, claiming that gays and lesbians "already have" marriage equality in the state...because they are free marry someone of the opposite sex:
[H]homosexuals already have the same marriage rights that everyone has. Every person in America has the right to marry someone of the opposite sex. Mississippians should not be fooled by the deceitful tactics that these groups are using to induce pity for homosexuals who cannot be married in Mississippi, because they have chosen a homosexual lifestyle.
Philadelphia Weekly recently interviewed Diane Gramley, head of the Pennsylvania chapter of the American Family Association, about an employment nondiscrimination law working its way through the state legislature. The interview was so good that today they decided to publish a transcript of the whole thing.
After lamenting that the gay people don’t want to be just “accepted,” but instead “want us to celebrate their sin,” Gramley goes on to argue that employment nondiscrimination laws aren’t needed because Pennsylvania has openly gay elected officials, so “where’s the proof that they’re being discriminated against?”
OK. So, we have two openly-gay members of the state House currently, Brian Sims and Mike Fleck. Are you worried about the work that they’re doing in Harrisburg—not just HB 300, but, say, the anti-bullying bill?
It’s the same type of situation. The anti-bullying bill is not necessarily about anti-bullying. To me, an anti-bullying bill does not have a list of protected classes. All students should be protected. I know the U.S. Department of Education is pushing this anti-bullying thing with sexual identity and orientation.
As far as being concerned, I know when Mike Fleck came out in December, he said nothing had changed. But down deep, I knew that things had changed, because most of those legislators, no matter where they’re at, or what level of government it is, who are open homosexuals, will be pushing their agenda.
And that’s the evidence right there. They both signed onto HB 300 and I know that Fleck was part of Equality Forum in April. I am concerned. But they’re saying they’re being discriminated against. One of the main mantras is that being gay can get you fired.
Right. That’s true. It can.
I’ve been to many local township or borough or even county meetings where that’s one of the main lines they use. But where’s the evidence? We have two open homosexuals who are state legislators. We have Dan Miller, who ran for mayor in Harrisburg, an open homosexual. He’s the controller right now, you know. So, where’s the proof that they’re being discriminated against?
OK, but that’s them. That’s three people. Wouldn’t it be easier for people who are gay to have laws in place to say they couldn’t be fired or couldn’t be refused staying in a hotel, just for their own sake?
But where’s the proof that it happens? That’s my whole thing. Where’s the proof that such happens?
Are you saying it doesn’t happen at all?
I’m not saying it doesn’t happen at all, but as far as the need to pass a law that you get into a situation where a homosexual is—if this law passes, if a homosexual is not hired or maybe fired from their job simply because they’re not doing their job properly, then their excuse could be, ‘I’m going to sue the company because I was fired because I was a homosexual.’ You could set up scenarios like that.
I guess that’s a possibility. But you could say that about anything, about the Civil Rights Act.
Which has nothing to do with homosexuality. The civil rights fight was dealing with an immutable characteristic. No one can change their skin color. No one can change from where they—their nationality. With the homosexual rights—quote, unquote, rights fight—they’re talking about something that can be changed. Homosexuality is not immutable. And I know a number of ex-gays. So, it is not something that cannot be changed.
Ohio anti-gay activist Phil Burress, head of Citizens for Community Values, is gearing up to fight a proposed ballot measure to make same-sex marriage legal in his state, and he’s not letting the facts get in his way.
Burress tells the Canton Repository that polls showing increasing support for marriage equality are just plain wrong:
“On no other issue in America is the polling data is so wrong,” he said. “The real polls are when people go to the polls and vote.”
He then warns of the “slippery slope” created by marriage equality. “What are you going to do for bisexuals?" he asks. "They have to have a man and a woman to make them happy.”
“Ask the question, how do you prohibit polygamy?” Burress said. “Or anything? You’ve gotta give them anything they want. When you start using words like ‘equal protection,’ or when you can say there’s discrimination, what are you going to do for bisexuals? They have to have a man and a woman to make them happy.”
WASHINGTON – In response to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) gaining bipartisan approval from the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee today, People For the American Way President Michael Keegan released the following statement:
“Today’s vote is an exciting step forward on the road toward full equality for LGBT Americans. All employees deserve to be judged by their qualifications and work performance rather than by who they are or who they love. ENDA is common-sense legislation that would establish employment protections for LGBT workers nationwide.
“There’s no question that protecting the rights of LGBT workers is the right thing to do, but it also increasingly reflects the values of most Americans. A majority of Americans support ENDA and they know that all hardworking people should have the same shot at earning a living and contributing to our economy and our country. And yet without ENDA, in 29 states it is currently legal to fire someone for being gay – and in 33 states for being transgender or gender non-conforming.
“The far Right is already clamoring that passing ENDA would lead to everything from sexual assault to the end of religious freedom in our country. But in reality, this legislation is the right thing to do and a no-brainer that all of Congress should be able to support. Workplace discrimination of any kind is not the American way.”
With the Employment Non-Discrimination Act scheduled for a Senate committee vote this week, here’s a look at Right Wing Watch’s collection of recent – and classic – claims from the Religious Right about ENDA. Because ENDA is common-sense civil rights legislation that would expand federal employment protections against discrimination to include sexual orientation and gender identity, the Right cannot gain much traction by opposing ENDA on its merits. Instead, resorting to fear-mongering and lies, they contend that ENDA will lead to everything from the end of religious freedom to sexual assault and death.
Here are highlights of Right Wing Watch’s reporting on right-wing opposition to ENDA:
5. Tony Perkins: ‘Totalitarian Homosexual Lobby’ Out to Destroy Religious Freedom with ENDA (March 2013)
“Like a B-grade 1950’s horror-movie, ENDA is coming back from the dead,” warned Family Research Council President Tony Perkins in a recent mailing. Perkins said President Obama is working with the “totalitarian homosexual lobby” to sneak ENDA into law, and if that happens, “Our freedom of religion will be destroyed.”
“In fact,” says Perkins in his letter, “under ENDA biblical morality becomes illegal.”
Read the full article here.
4. Steve Crampton: ENDA is Insanity (June 2012)
Speaking about a Senate hearing on ENDA, Liberty Counsel’s “Faith and Freedom” radio host Steve Crampton marveled that a transgender person was actually allowed to testify on behalf of the legislation and complained that ENDA is not about “equal rights” but rather “special rights” for gays and cross-dressers.
Crampton stated that if ENDA passed, he could come into work – “God forbid,” he said – wearing a dress and would be allowed to use the women’s restroom. “In years past,” Crampton said, “we had another word for this: it’s called insanity.”
Read the full article here.
3. Andrea Lafferty Cites CT School Shooting to Rally Opposition to Non-Discrimination Policies (December 2012)
Andrea Lafferty of the Traditional Values Coalition used the school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, in order to bolster her campaign against ENDA. While speaking to Janet Mefferd about the Orange County, Florida, school system’s new non-discrimination policy that is similar to ENDA, Lafferty said that just as parents are upset about the Sandy Hook elementary school shooting and are concerned about keeping their children safe, they should also be worried about ENDA’s “devastating effects” as schools will have “people with some real issues playing out their personal problems in the classroom.”
Lafferty maintained that ENDA is part of the left’s “open season” on Christians on behalf of “fringe minorities and people that are truly sick.” She warned that Chick-fil-A restaurants may soon be “forced” to hire “weirdos” seeking to undermine Christian businesses, warning that transgender people are committing “the ultimate act of self-hatred” and need “special medical treatment” rather than job protections.
Read the full article here.
2. Bryan Fischer: Businesses Threatened by ‘Flaming Homosexual’ Job Applicants and the ‘Return of Jim Crow Laws’ (January 2013)
American Family Association spokesman Bryan Fischer warned in a blog post that “ENDA would represent the return of Jim Crow laws.” On his radio program Focal Point, Fischer warned that if ENDA is signed into law businesses will be faced with a barrage of “flaming homosexual” job applicants. “The homosexual lobby,” Fischer said, “will send a guy in there wearing stilettos, a dress and dangly earrings” in order to provoke Christian business-owners “not to hire him.”
Read the full article here.
1. Mat Staver: ENDA Will Result in the 'Death of Some Individuals' (June 2012)
Liberty Counsel chairman Mat Staver is ratcheting up the rhetoric in opposition to ENDA, even going so far as to say that if passed the legislation may lead to child molestation, sexual assault, and death. Staver told Jim Schneider of VCY America on Crosstalk that ENDA “will put individuals at risk and ultimately result in significant damage and even death of some individuals”:
Staver: So you can go into these restrooms or changing rooms, if you’re a man, and want to go in and molest, or watch, or sexually assault young girls. So, I mean, the absurdity of this is just beyond understanding how someone could be in favor of it. This will ultimately, in addition to colliding with religious liberty, in addition to forcing a radical agenda on people, this also will put individuals at risk and ultimately result in significant damage and even death of some individuals.
Read the full article here.
Concerned Women for America’s Janice Shaw Crouse visited Eagle Forum Live on Saturday, where she spoke with Phyllis Schlafly about the Supreme Court’s decision striking down the key provision of the Defense of Marriage Act.
The two were not optimistic for the future of the country after the DOMA decision. In fact, Crouse implied that same-sex marriage would undermine community volunteerism because “a man and a woman committed to each other for life” are “where we get our volunteers for hospitals, our volunteers for services to the homeless, our volunteers for all sorts of community outreaches, from the local scout troop to volunteering to visit the sick in individual churches.”
Schlafly: Tell us what you think about the real importance and the role that traditional marriage has played in our society and must play in our society if we’re going to continue to be a free country.
Crouse: Well, I think we’re all used to hearing the arguments that marriage is best for individuals, it’s best for women, it’s best for men, it’s best for children. And I have a whole book on how marriage has really, the demise of marriage has really hurt our children. But I think the thing that is really relevant right now is the fact that marriage is so good for communities, for nations. You cannot have a strong nation without strong marriages, it’s just as simple as that, because marriage is a husband and a wife working together.
A man and a woman committed to each other for life and committed to their children are the backbone of communities. That’s where we get our volunteers for hospitals, our volunteers for services to the homeless, our volunteers for all sorts of community outreaches, from the local scout troop to volunteering to visit the sick in individual churches. Volunteers generally come from families, people who are invested in the community and have a long-term interest in that community’s strength. And the same thing holds for nations.
Later in the conversation, Schlafly lamented that public schools are teaching children “that there are all kinds of families and you have to be respectful of all kinds.” Crouse responded that “it’s even worse than that,” because “we cannot even look at magazines at the supermarket checkout counter without having in our face homosexual embraces and couples who are flaunting [sic] public opinion and flaunting public mores.”
“It’s, I think, very egregious that we have to live with these kinds of public demonstrations that are trying to desensitize our children,” she added.
Schlafly: Janice, I wish you’d particularly address the problem in the schools, because I’m concerned that what the children are going to be taught in schools and what they cannot be taught in the schools.
Crouse: Well, we’re already seeing so much bias against Christians in our schools. It’s appalling to me as the grandmother of seven children who are in public schools. I’m seeing the evidence in a variety of different schools, from elementary through high school, where children are not allowed to express their own personal views in the context of the school, as though they only have freedom of speech at home or in the confines of their church or local synagogue or temple, wherever they worship.
Schlafly: Well, Dr. Crouse, it’s even worse than that. In their courses, they’re teaching them that there are all kinds of families and you have to be respectful of all kinds, and don’t pay any attention to what your parents say.
Crouse: Exactly. And it’s even worse than that, when you have indoctrination as early as preschool and in elementary school, as early as first grade and kindergarten, where kids are reading books. And we cannot even look at magazines at the supermarket checkout counter without having in our face homosexual embraces and couples who are flaunting public opinion and flaunting public mores. It’s, I think, very egregious that we have to live with these kinds of public demonstrations that are trying to desensitize our children.
Crouse added that she was appalled that “too many” conservatives “are unwilling to die” for the anti-gay cause, and have instead become “complacent” and decided to “live and let live”:
Conservatives, far too many, are unwilling to die for it. They are too complacent, they are too laissez faire, they really do not understand the impact of what’s happening in this country, to the point that they are willing to take a stand and make a difference. Far too many people are saying, ‘Well, I live and let live. I’m not going to be judgmental. This is what I believe, but I’m not going to foist my beliefs off on other people,’ or, ‘I can’t go out there into the public square and say these kinds of things.’ I think we have to discover a courage, we have to be very brave, we have to be willing to say, ‘This is where I stand. These are the values that made this country great. These are the values that are important to me and to my family and to my family’s future and to the family of this country.’
The Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins has already called the Supreme Court’s ruling striking down the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act “absurd,” and warned that it presents “a clear and present danger to the freedom of speech and the freedom of religion in our country” and pushes America further down the road to becoming Sodom and Gomorrah.
In a member email today, Perkins elaborates on his outrage, claiming that the Supreme Court’s DOMA decision means “the landscape has been fundamentally altered in a society where the rule of law is slowly unraveling.” In guaranteeing that legally married same-sex couples are treated as married by the federal government, Perkins writes, the Supreme Court requires the government to provide benefits to married gay couples that “until yesterday, were reserved for real spouses.”
And, of course, Perkins added that we are on our way to legalized polygamy, which he claims is a part of the liberal “agenda.”
That said, the landscape has been fundamentally altered in a society where the rule of law is slowly unraveling. Twelve states can now force taxpayers to supply more than 1,100 benefits which, until yesterday, were reserved for real spouses. And both the court and rogue leaders like Jerry Brown have, in the words of Justice Antonin Scalia, "declared open season on any law that... can be characterized as mean-spirited." In a nation where our own President feels no obligation to defend the law, it's no wonder the Human Rights Campaign thinks it can impose same-sex "marriage" on every state in five years.
When the Left fell short of their goals yesterday, it gave our movement the most valuable commodity of all: time to persuade the country of the consequences. But it also meant that the waves of attack will keep coming -- stronger and more vicious than ever before. Emboldened by Justice Anthony Kennedy's sharp rebuke of our side, liberals aren't even bothering to hide the rest of their agenda. Polygamists popped the corked on a little champagne of their own after Wednesday's rulings, as they wait their turn for nationwide acceptance.