Fighting the Right

Larry Pratt's Remedy for School Shootings: More Spanking

Gun Owners of America head Larry Pratt went back on VCY America’s Crosstalk, where he last month insisted that the health care reform law was meant to “take away your guns,” to talk to host Jim Schneider about the school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut.

Pratt agreed with a caller who said that drugs such as Prozac were leading people to kill and another caller wondered if drugs are “raising a bunch of Manchurian candidates.” A man purporting to be Lanza’s uncle had claimed that he was using an antipsychotic drug, Fanapt, but the “uncle” turned out to be an imposter.

Just as many other right-wing commentators blamed the Newtown massacre on the public school system, even though Lanza was homeschooled, Pratt suggested that corporal punishment, along with the arming of teachers, would ensure that schools aren’t “death traps for kids.”

Caller: These kids are on psychotropic drugs, mainly Prozac, which makes them homicidal or suicidal and a lot of the teachers who can’t handle these kids are recommending that they go in for psychiatric treatment and next thing you know they are on these drugs.

Pratt: The teachers aren’t allowed to spank them anymore, which didn’t have any long lasting effects other than, ‘I don’t want that to happen again so I’ll behave in the future.’ But the drugs, as you were getting to I think change their minds.



Caller: I also wanted to know on the coattails of the gentleman that mentioned Prozac: are we raising a bunch of Manchurian candidates?

Pratt: That’s a valid question. I guess there could be long-term damage done by these drugs that may not manifest themselves until sometime in the future because of who knows what stimulus that occurs. But it’s just a very dangerous thing to be playing with the makeup of people’s minds. It’s so avoidable, all we have do is admit that children need discipline, they respond well to it and then things are much more under control. We’ve lost control of our schools in so many places in the United States and it really could be addressed effectively and we refuse to. It’s almost equivalent to the refusal to talk about using drugs in self-defense and making it so teachers, principals and janitors could be armed at schools. ‘Everybody knows that guns and children don’t mix,’ well no, actually everybody doesn’t know that, and in fact that notion, as I have said before today, that notion is unhappily the big reason why schools are such death traps for kids.

After warning against government “confiscation” of firearms, Pratt floated debunked conspiracy theories about the Social Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security purchasing ammunition for nefarious reasons and maintained that all policing on the federal level is unconstitutional.

Pratt: I think the more people invest in protecting themselves in this fashion, paying all this money for firearms to defend themselves, any call for confiscation such as came from the Governor of New York and I gather other politicians as well is going to be met with, shall we say, no respect.

Schneider: Perhaps on that issue there have been a number of stories that have come out recently that the US government is just buying up massive rounds of ammunition. One story indicated the Department of Homeland Security has purchased over a billion rounds of hollow point ammunition for domestic purposes, not for military purposes. Some stories have indicated that even the Social Security Administration has purchased 174,000 rounds of ammo. Is there any truth for this or is this some kind of hype that’s out of control?

Pratt: The reports continue and they are in the mainline press. When you read about the Social Security buying large quantities of ammunition, whatever for? Did somebody lose their check and they’re going to go shoot them up? What exactly is it that Social Security Administration needs a police force at all let alone buying that many rounds? Target practice I don’t think consumes that many and frankly they shouldn’t be having target practices, they shouldn’t have police forces at the federal level, those are not constitutional.

Anti-Gay Coalition Leader Cites Murder Rate to Oppose Marriage Equality

Last month, anti-gay groups in Illinois formed the Coalition to Protect Children and Marriage to oppose impending legislation to legalize same-sex marriage in the state. Coalition leader Paul Caprio of Family-PAC spoke to Sandy Rios today and warned that the gay rights bill will cause more children to go into foster care and seek state assistance. He even pointed to the city of Chicago’s murder rate as a reason to oppose marriage equality.

Listen: 

We think it’s important that we block this in the state of Illinois. We know that there have been several referendums recently in other more progressive states, frankly more liberal states, where this has passed by narrow margins, but we feel that it’s very important to stand up. You know, it’s interesting, when you stop to think about it what should the interest of the state be relative to the issue of marriage? The state, more than anyone, should be looking at marriage in terms of protection of children if for no other reason that if children are not protected, and children need foster care or they need DCF [Department for Children and Families] assistance, it costs the state so much more money. Just looking at it from the point of view from the state, not the point of view that we look at things from, including the moral perspective of this issue, but it’s really interesting when you stop to think about it. Chicago, it was announced yesterday, is murder capital of the United States: 506 murders. We have the second highest unwed—or children out of wedlock birth rate, of any major city in the United States, right behind Detroit. All of these things are for reasons and one of the major reasons is the breakdown and the lack of a stable family for children.

Ryan Dobson Defends his Father's Comments About Sandy Hook, Calling Him 'a Man who is Making a Stand for Righteousness'

Shortly after the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School, James Dobson weighed in to declare that the shooting was evidence that God has "allowed judgment to fall upon us" because the nation has turned its back on him by accepting things like abortion and gay marriage.

Those remarks, not surprisingly, generated some controversy and so, last Friday, Ryan Dobson sought to set the record straight on "Dr. James Dobson's Family Talk" radio broadcast where he asserted that his father's remarks were taken out of context and that he is the victim of an agenda-driven effort to smear him:

Some of our listeners may have seen some of the buzz on-line, especially on our Facebook page, surrounding comments made by my dad right here on the Family Talk broadcast following the Sandy Hook Elementary tragedy that took place on Friday, December 14th.  But believe it or not, people with their own personal agenda have splattered all over the internet and the blogosphere that my dad, Dr. James Dobson, said that God caused the murder of those children and those adults and let me tell you that is a lie, and I believe that is an intentional distortion of my dad's words and it's taken totally out of context.

There have been a lot of accusations aimed at my dad over the years; he is called hateful and a bigot, all kinds of vile things that I would never repeat on the air and I always ask people [to] just quote him. Show me where ... I mean, if he's that hateful, if he's that mean of a person, he's been on air for thirty-five years, he's written over eighty book, if that's who he is, you should have volumes of evidence to bring forth, but there's nothing there!

I just want to say to our friends and our listeners, if you see something distributed about my dad that is outlandish, please consider the source. A lot of these bloggers and online columnists have an agenda and they are just throwing bricks at a man who is making a stand for righteousness.

Of course, our entire original post was built on directly quoting James Dobson himself saying that Sandy Hook was God's judgment:

Our country really does seem in complete disarray. I'm not talking politically, I'm not talking about the result of the November sixth election;  I am saying that something has gone wrong in America and that we have turned our back on God.

I mean millions of people have decided that God doesn't exist, or he's irrelevant to me and we have killed fifty-four million babies and the institution of marriage is right on the verge of a complete redefinition.  Believe me, that is going to have consequences too. 

And a lot of these things are happening around us, and somebody is going to get mad at me for saying what I am about to say right now, but I am going to give you my honest opinion: I think we have turned our back on the Scripture and on God Almighty and I think he has allowed judgment to fall upon us.  I think that's what's going on.

How the NRA is Working with Senate Republicans to Block Judicial Nominees

The New York Times’ Linda Greenhouse has a great blog post up on the National Rifle Association’s little-known role in influencing Senate votes on federal judicial nominees. Greenhouse focuses on the NRA’s effort to scare Republican Senators away from voting for the Supreme Court nominations of Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan – neither of whom had any actual Second Amendment record – and its successful effort to frustrate the DC Circuit nomination of Caitlin Halligan, who had once represented the state of New York in a gun control case.

These are the most prominent examples of the NRA’s efforts to keep qualified judicial nominees off the federal bench without reason. But there are plenty more examples out there. One of the most appalling is that of Elissa Cadish, who President Obama nominated to fill a district court seat in Nevada back in February. The NRA immediately got to work to stop Cadish’s nomination. Why? One month before the Supreme Court’s Heller decision – in which it overturned decades of case law to state that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual’s right to own firearms – Cadish correctly answered a questionnaire about the current state of Second Amendment law. At the time, Cadish correctly stated that the law that she would follow as a district court judge did not include the individual right to bear firearms. After Heller, she clarified that she would of course follow current law, which now did include this right.

This was a sign of proper judicial restraint – district court judges are in the business of applying the law as interpreted by higher courts – but to the NRA it was an excuse to bring down a judicial nominee. The gun group strong-armed Nevada Sen. Dean Heller into opposing the nomination and that was that. Heller refused to give his permission for the Senate Judiciary Committee to even hold a hearing on Cadish (permission is traditionally required from both home-state senators), and her nomination foundered.

The NRA didn’t get involved with these judicial nominations because it had substantive reasons to oppose the nominees. It got involved because it is, in effect, a codependent wing of the Republican party. Greenhouse points out that it was Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell who reached out to the NRA about opposing Sotomayor, rather than the other way around. Senate Republicans want to stop President Obama from filling seats on the federal courts. They then used the NRA as a useful bludgeon to keep in line senators who might consider being reasonable. The NRA and the Republican leadership get what they want from this relationship. The rest of us get a gridlocked Senate, a vacancy crisis in the federal courts and nation awash in firearms.

PFAW

Thank You from PFAW Founder Norman Lear

Please take a moment to watch this end-of-the-year thank you message for you and all of PFAW's wonderful supporters around the world from PFAW founder Norman Lear:

year end donate

PFAW

Circuit Court Rejects Attack on Contraception Coverage

The 10th Circuit rejects the argument that an employer's religious liberty is substantially burdened by the contraception coverage requirement.
PFAW Foundation

Gun Advocates Now Worried They'll Be Victims of Hate Crimes?

We have to admit that things are getting very confusing when right-wing gun advocates are now worrying that criticism of their agenda is putting them at risk of becoming victims of hate crimes:

Statements made by broadcasters including CNN’s Piers Morgan and MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, as well as comments on social media have contributed to an environment of hate directed against law-abiding Americans who are being demonized for a crime they did not commit, said Joseph P. Tartaro, the president of the Bellevue, Wash.-based Second Amendment Foundation.

Morgan called one national gun rights leader Larry Pratt, the executive director of Gun Owners of America: “an unbelievably stupid man,” he said.

Matthews suggested gun owners are, “..people on the far-right (who) never lose their passion…Normal people have other interests like their spouses, their lives, their children, and even their generalized politics isn’t driven by one issue,” he said

...

“This kind of rhetoric does not contribute to any rational discussion,” [Alan M. Gottlieb, SAF executive vice president] said.

“Vitriol like this only promotes hate, but apparently it’s okay to perpetuate bigotry so long as you are an anti-gunner, and a liberal. If anyone is harmed as a result of this hate campaign, we expect them to be prosecuted under the hate crimes laws,” he said.

“If this hate speech leads to hate crimes,” Gottlieb concluded, “people like Piers Morgan and Chris Matthews will be partly responsible.”

Of course, actual hate crimes legislation only applies to crimes commited on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, or disability; gun ownership does not qualify.

'Prophets' Forecasted Romney Victory Until He Lost

Not only were many conservative leaders confidently predicting a comfortable Romney victory in last month’s elections but so were many Religious Right activists who cloaked the imminent Romney win in spiritual terms. Even the “Bible Code” pointed to a Romney presidency! Of course, President Obama ended up winning re-election and these predictions were quickly forgotten by those who made them.

But Rick Joyner is still perplexed that Romney lost given that all of his fellow “prophets” thought he’d win. In his “Word of the Week” bulletin, Joyner said he was “sorry that we did not do better in understanding this election” and wonders why he knew “a lot of prophetic people who fully expected Romney to win the election.”

The only explanation Joyner thought of was that while Christians were united against Obama like never before, they were just too afraid to vote for a Mormon.

Because the 2012 elections continue to be a source of confusion to many, we will address a couple of more lessons to learn from this to finish out this year. Then we will begin the New Year with possibly unprecedented opportunities to see our nation turn to the Lord for the greatest harvest in history.

I know a lot of prophetic people who fully expected Romney to win the election. Of those I communicated with about the election, I do not know of any who gave a prophecy that Romney would win, but it was an almost universal opinion. I did not even seek a word from the Lord about it myself because I felt that I already had His opinion. That was a huge presumption.

Bob Jones had an encounter with the Lord on January 16, 2012 in which the Lord asked him what he thought about having a Mormon for President. This was long before the Republican nomination had been decided, and Bob’s response was that he did not think very much of it. Bob held to that opinion until after the nomination was won by Romney, and then he believed that he must have been wrong and that Romney must be God’s choice. After the election, he realized how he had let his own opinions cancel out what the Lord was trying to show him in the first place.

Bob is the most seasoned and wise prophetic person I know, and in great wisdom, he embraced this correction. Even the greatest prophets still see in part and prophesy in part. We have had many prophetic words come true exactly as they were given, but we misinterpreted them until they were fulfilled. I still consider interpretation one of the greatest weaknesses in the prophetic ministry, but it was also this way throughout history, including biblical history. Even so, I believe we must do better with interpreting what we are being shown prophetically.

Some would interpret the question that Bob was asked by the Lord to mean that the Lord did not want a Mormon as President, but that is not what the Lord said either. In fact, the Lord did not say anything, but just asked a question. That question may have been the ultimate question that in fact decided the election. Maybe we should have spent far more attention trying to answer that question than we did. I’m not saying that it was, but it could have been. Romney could have been God’s choice, but I know many good Christians who did not vote because they said they could not vote for a Mormon.



This past election was too good of an opportunity to learn to sweep it under the rug. I feel that I have learned something profound almost every day since the election. Wisdom and understanding are worth much more than gold or silver. I am sorry that we did not do better in understanding this election, but I love the correction because of what I’m learning. If we learn our lessons from this, they could save us in far more crucial times to come. I hope this is helpful, and I have a bit more to share next week.

Or, maybe Romney really did win but Obama stole the election.

Beware: Human-Hating Liberals and Islamic Extremists Seek to Build Shariommunism

The claim that progressives and radical Islamists are secretly working together would be considered laughable if it didn’t inspire violent terrorists like Norway’s Anders Breivik and emerge as a frequent talking point among right-wing activists. Christian Broadcasting Network’s sports reporter/terrorism “expert” Erick Stakelbeck hosted Jamie Glazov of the David Horowitz Freedom Center to explain the purported alliance.

According to Glazov, both liberals and Islamic extremists “share the agenda to destroy freedom, capitalism, democracy, American and Israel” in order to establish Sharia law and communism! Liberalism and Islamism, he claims, both have “a hatred for humans for who and what they are.”

“I haven’t been this scared since I was watching eleven years old watching the Exorcist,” Glazov said, “we have our first political prisoner in the United States.” He was referring to the producer of an anti-Islam film who was put back in prison for violating his probation agreement following a bank fraud conviction.

Later, Glazov explained that Islamic-aligned leftists “are in the White House” and “infiltrating the State Department” to advance their goal of “destroying this country.”

Watch:

Sandy Rios Exposes the Left's Plot to use Christmas to Distract Conservatives

American Family Association radio host Sandy Rios today “exposed” the left’s plan to set crucial legislative votes around the Christmas season in order to distract conservative activists who are too busy celebrating the holiday to wage political battle. Pointing to the 2009 Senate Christmas Eve vote to pass the health care reform law and the push by LGBT rights advocates in Illinois to legalize same-sex marriage in January as proof, Rios claimed that crafty liberals know that “Christian people who care about Christmas [are] the same ones who are concerned about implementing homosexual marriage” and blocking the health care law. “This is how they win their battles,” she said.

It’s interesting how the left pushes this stuff, so much of this always comes down to Christmas. Remember last year, the Obamacare bill? They kept members of Congress debating on Christmas Eve, you know they have no concern, no real concern about what this season means to people because it doesn’t mean much to them. Other than just a family holiday, I don’t think they understand; there’s no reverence for it. So they voted Christmas Eve last year for Obamacare. Now interestingly enough the same tactic is being employed in Illinois in a very different way. When we come back in January we will discuss this. Suddenly, as of last Friday, gay activists in Illinois want homosexual marriage in Illinois, they want it. So it looks like a vote will take place, are you ready? Sometime between January 2nd and 9th. So pro-family forces are trying to gear up, guess what time of year this is? Guess what weekend this is? The weekend before Christmas when churches are doing special programs, music, pastors are preparing profound sermons as an outreach to the community; this is what Christian people who care about Christmas being the same ones who are concerned about implementing homosexual marriage. This is how they win their battles.

Of course, the House Republican leadership just (unsuccessfully) pushed their Plan B legislation a mere five days before Christmas, but apparently it’s only a problem when liberals hold votes during the holiday season.

Close Bachmann Ally Bradlee Dean Suggests Sandy Hook was a Government Plot

Bradlee Dean, whose close ties to Rep. Michele Bachmann are well-known and well-established, published a column in WND (Rick Santorum's new home) suggesting that, just as the Nazis burned the Reichstag, the shootings at Sandy Hook and in Aurora, Colorado were orchestrated by the government:

The Sandy Hook shooting occurred just days after Sen. Rand Paul sent out an alert that the U.N. was set to pass the final version of the Small Arms Treaty, supported by Obama the day after election.

Part of the treaty bans the trade, sale and ownership of all semi-automatic weapons … like the one Adam Lanza used to kill 20 children and 6 adults.

The “Batman shooting” in Aurora, Colo., also happened to coincide with the same time as negotiations of the U.N. Small Arms Treaty.

The timing is impeccable.

As we reflect upon massacres such as Sandy Hook, Aurora, the Sikh Temple in Wisconsin, Tuscon, Ariz., and Columbine, we cannot help but see the similarities: conflicting news reports on what happened, who did the killing and the number of shooters. Eyewitnesses in all of these massacres said there were more shooters than the media maintain, indicating the shootings were coordinated and planned.

When the “fire” is started, these government gun banners are right there to strip away your rights in an attempt to gain control under the guise of “putting out the fire.”

Adolf Hitler was responsible for attacking his own Reichstag to start a world war. Hitler was also responsible for sending his brownshirts to incite the people so he could play the role of solving their problems. No one believed Hitler was guilty of these crimes until after the fact.

Then it was too late.

It turns out that not only was the government behind these two shootings, but also Columbine, Ruby Ridge, Waco, the Oklahoma City bombing, and 9/11, according to this new video produced and narrated by Dean:

Judson Phillips: 'If You Want to Pin Blame on Sandy Hook, Blame the Teachers Unions'

Tea Party Nation head Judson Phillips has been pushing out articles from his fellow TPN activists attacking teachers over the Sandy Hook shooting and is now finally out with a post of his own blaming teachers for the massacre. He said teachers’ unions are a “focus of evil” as they have turned the school into a “target rich environments for some lunatic or terrorist,” urging the government to ban unions and “break up the public school system.”

If you want to pin blame on Sandy Hook, blame the Teachers Unions that have championed schools being gun free zones. While the left is demonizing the NRA and moronic actors like Marg Helgenberger are calling for NRA members to be shot, the Teachers Union is actually the focus of evil in the pre and post Sandy Hook world.

The American Federation of Teachers is led by a nitwit named Randi Weingarten. After Sandy Hook, this brain donor opined the way to stop future mass killings in schools was to make them a complete and absolute gun free zone.

D’oh!

Weingarten certainly proves that a high IQ is clearly an impediment to being the leader of the Teachers Union.



As Sandy Hook proved, our schools are target rich environments for some lunatic or terrorist.

As the Teachers Union screams about banning guns, we need to talk about banning the Teachers Union.



Most Americans with children have no other choice but to send their kids to public schools. Americans deserve better than a rotten education system that serves only to benefit the Teachers Union and corrupt left wing politicians.

After Sandy Hook, one of the best things we can do is break the back of the Teachers Union and break up the public school system.

Pastor: 9/11 and CT School Shooting were 'Gracious' Acts of God's Judgment

Pastor Bill Elliff of the Arkansas-based The Summit Church and the Religious Right group OneCry appeared on AFA Today with host Buster Wilson this week where he explained that the September 11 attacks and the elementary shooting in Newtown, Connecticut were “gracious” acts of divine punishment. He said that God allowed the two tragedies to occur because of “our humanistic pride” and secular government in order to “bring us to our senses and bring us back to him.”

Wilson was positively dumbfounded as to why people would be offended by such rhetoric and similar language by AFA spokesman Bryan Fischer, who said that God refused to stop the school shooting because he’s a “gentleman,” and Elliff worried the U.S. is going the way of the Roman and British empires.

Wilson: I have never seen the vitriol that has been unleashed against us, some of us here at this ministry, since we’ve been publicly saying: you know what one of the problems is for the last fifty years we’ve been saying to God we don’t want you, there’s a wall of separation between us, and the place you’ve seen that amplified most has been in the public schools. We have received just unbelievable vitriol for saying that, seeing it as too simplistic, one person wrote ‘this is 2013, are we still wrestling over Creationism?’ We are in a changing, almost post-Christian America is what it seems like at time, what’s gonna happen if we don’t turn back to the Lord and see great revival brought about?

Elliff: I think what’s going to happen is what’s happened to every society before us who has not turned back. I was thinking the other day probably in Rome they thought ‘this could never happen to us’ and England in its prime they said ‘this could never happen to us.’ There is something about our humanistic pride that causes us to think, we could never go down as a nation.



Elliff: I’ve often thought about 9/11 and what happened there. God doesn’t cause evil, he didn’t cause the shooting the other day. But when we say, ‘Lord we can live life without you,’ then he says, ‘okay, I’ll let you feel that.’

Wilson: Let you get a taste of it.

Elliff: I thought at 9/11 what happened was God’s protective hand was removed and we felt what pure evil is like. We felt that this last week. That was pure evil, it’s the devil who has come to steal, kill and destroy. He’d just as soon kill a baby or a child in the womb as anything else. God allows that moment, we’re pressing the issue by turning from him, but he allows that moment to bring us to our senses and say, ‘God we desperately need you.’ So really it’s gracious. The pain that comes, the judgment that has really come by our turning away from the Lord is a merciful thing that God does to bring us to our senses and bring us back to him.

Elliff explained that the shooting was a sign of God’s discipline as “judgment comes to a nation it is God saying, wake up, you have walked away from me and I have loved you and I have so much desire to protect you but when you walk away you forfeit that.”

Elliff: We look at what has happened recently here in the school shooting and the so many things that have happened in the past few years. If we put all of those in biblical context and surround it with the Scripture we would come to different conclusions about what was happening. I was thinking the other day that God has instituted pain in our body, you know when you get a rusty nail that goes up to the sole of your foot that’s a real good thing that you feel pain because it causes you to make an adjustment. God’s judgment is like that. It’s a loving God saying to us when judgment comes to a nation it is God saying, wake up, you have walked away from me and I have loved you and I have so much desire to protect you but when you walk away you forfeit that.

Franklin Graham on Sandy Hook: 'This is What Happens When a Society Turns Its Back on God'

Franklin Graham called in to American Family Radio today to talk with the AFA's leading conspiracy theorist Buster Wilson about a variety of issues, including last week's shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, which Graham blamed on television and music and video games before inevitably blaming the supposed removal of God from our schools and public places, saying "these politicians in Washington; we've taken God our of our school, we've taken him out of our government and now we seem shocked at all of these things.  Why are we shocked? We shouldn't be shocked.  This is what happens when a society turns its back on God":

Cindy Jacobs Remembers the Time God Sent an Angel to Help Her Make Travel Arrangements

On the most recent episode of the Generals International "God Knows" television program, "respected prophet" Cindy Jacobs and her husband Mike were discussing the existence of an "invisible realm [that] is populated with powerful angelic hosts that want to take care of you."

Case in point was the time when Jacobs traveled to Venezuela and arrived just as the airport was closing, only to find that there was nobody there to pick her up.  Not speaking the language or having any local currency, Jacobs was trapped ... until a literal angel appeared with a calling card to help her make hotel and travel arrangements:

Staver: Supreme Court could spark Second Revolution and Civil War over Marriage Equality

According to Liberty Counsel head Mat Staver, if the Supreme Court rules in favor of marriage equality, America may head toward outright revolt and a second civil war. Staver told Janet Parshall that marriage equality will mean that the institution of marriage, freedom of speech and the freedom of religion will be “destroyed” and “bulldozed over.”

Like Family Research Council president Tony Perkins who last month maintained that the Supreme Court may start a “revolution” and “break this nation apart” by striking down gay marriage bans, Staver said that the court “could split the country right in two” as “this is the thing that revolutions literally are made of.”

“This would be more devastating to our freedom, to our religious freedom, to the rights of pastors and their duty to be able to speak and to Christians around the country, then anything that the revolutionaries during the American Revolution even dreamed of facing,” Staver said, “This could cause another civil war.”

Staver: Basically marriage will be completely destroyed, families will be destroyed, children will be hurt by this and freedom of speech and freedom of religion, including in the pulpit itself, will absolutely be bulldozed over. This would open a floodgate of unimaginable proportions. That’s why with those kinds of consequences to have five of the nine justices ultimately have this kind of power in their hands, that’s not how this court and this country was established, to have five individuals to be able to have that kind of catastrophic, social reengineering power in their hands, that’s just not something that was envisioned by the founders.

Parshall: Absolutely right. God hasn’t given us a spirit of fear but of power and of love and of a sound mind so we need to be in prayer, but I also think we need to be preparing our hearts as well Mat that if in fact the Supreme Court decides to trample underfoot the truth of God’s word, we as a church are going have to decide what we’re going to do. Mat, you know I’m going to appeal to your pastor’s heart, that means that every single pastor who is called to hold out the word of life is going to have to decide whether or not he is going to sidestep certain passages for fear of some sort of response from the government.

Staver: This is the thing that revolutions literally are made of. This would be more devastating to our freedom, to our religious freedom, to the rights of pastors and their duty to be able to speak and to Christians around the country, then anything that the revolutionaries during the American Revolution even dreamed of facing. This would be the thing that revolutions are made of. This could split the country right in two. This could cause another civil war. I’m not talking about just people protesting in the streets, this could be that level because what would ultimately happen is a direct collision would immediately happen with pastors, with churches, with Christians, with Christian ministries, with other businesses, it would be an avalanche that would go across the country.

He even argued that marriage equality laws “destroy the very foundation of our family” and have “catastrophic consequences,” including “the unraveling of the United States.”

Parshall: There is no ambiguity as to what the definition of marriage is. Here are nine people in black robes who are basically going to judge, and I’m going to put this in the vernacular of the common man, these are nine people who are basically going to say: God didn’t say that and here’s our ruling. I know I really distilled it down but you’ve got judges who are basically going to decide for us at the high level, potentially, how marriage should be defined. That’s amazing. Who would have thought we would ever find ourselves in that place?

Staver: It’s stunning. That’s why I am very concerned that this has made its way to the United States Supreme Court because only five of those nine can make a decision and so five people, potentially, in the United States, only five out of the hundreds of millions that we have, have in their hand this opportunity to literally wreck marriage, to destroy the very foundation of our family and the biblical definition of marriage. The consequences are staggering. This could be the Roe v. Wade of marriage and family. If we ultimately say as a court and if the country follows it that marriage is between two people of the same sex and it’s now how common sense, history and the Bible ultimately defines it, that has catastrophic consequences. That is staggering and it is actually something that we ought to be in significant prayer about because this could be the unraveling of the United States.

WND Floats Armed Resistance to Obama Administration

Earlier this week, WorldNetDaily columnist and regular Fox News guest Erik Rush tweeted a video arguing that President Obama orchestrated the Sandy Hook and Aurora, Colorado shootings in order to cover-up a massive government scandal, forcibly disarm Americans, put people in concentration camps and start a civil war. Of course the conspiracy theory is complete nonsense, but Rush doesn’t think so.

Today in WND, Rush effectively suggested that people should begin an armed revolt against the government: “There are also Americans – some misguided, some ideologues – who work every day of the week in the cause of compromising our liberties,” Rush writes, “I suppose suggesting that we shoot them wouldn’t be taken very well – although that is precisely what it came down to 236 years ago.”

Rush, who hoped that a Romney administration would imprison liberals and journalists, like in the conspiracy video warns that the Obama administration is using the school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, to “divert attention from its own abject criminality,” crack down on gun ownership, do away with the Constitution and require “compulsory periodic assessments of citizens by government psychologists.”

Within hours of the first reports of the heinous massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., last week, it was evident that members of the gun-control lobby, dedicated leftist organizations and elements of the press were finding the circumstances of this crime simply delicious. I say that because of the alacrity with which they immediately initiated email barrages to their mailing lists and the shamelessly biased reporting of the shootings in the context of a need for swift and sweeping changes to America’s firearms laws.



In an address advertised as intending to console residents of Newtown on Dec. 16 (I suppose one could call it a “consolation address”), President Obama furtively telegraphed his intention to advance gun-control legislation through more of his subtle tyranny. Like so many instances in the past, Obama peremptorily (though erroneously) circumscribed the problem, then alluded to more “fundamental transformation” being required to solve it, whether this involves the wholesale subordination of industrial sectors to the government, unconstitutional legislation, or dark-of-the-night, unpublicized executive orders.

In Obamaspeak, “We have to change” simply means we must be willing to pitch the Constitution, capitalism, notions of liberty and traditional values as Obama sees fit. In an effort to squeeze as much popular political capital from the Sandy Hook tragedy as possible, the administration sent an email late Monday directing supporters to the president’s weekend speech online, in which he promised to take action to prevent mass shootings.

There were also donation link buttons on the page with the video and Obama’s pledge, which gives rise to a visual of vultures picking flesh from the carcasses of dead first-graders. It also bears mentioning here that the Newtown massacre has presented the Obama administration with a stellar opportunity to divert attention from its own abject criminality.

Of course, Obama’s sympathies, like those of anti-gun lobbyists and liberals in general, ostensibly have their genesis in our safety. Everyone wants to feel safe, of course. Don’t you want your children to be safe? Progressives want guns out of citizens’ hands so they feel safe when they circumvent or otherwise subvert the Bill of Rights.



It is of the utmost importance that Americans become aware of the dedicated efforts that are being made to transform us from citizens into subjects, and that we are already at war. This is a war we have not seen the likes of previously and that will challenge notions of war for centuries to come. Even if we did not have the Second Amendment to stand on, I would still support gun rights, because guns are not the issue – power is. Next will come edged weapons control, then blunt weapons control, then compulsory periodic assessments of citizens by government psychologists.

There are millions of Americans for whom “it can’t happen here” has been well-inculcated into their worldview; these have been conditioned to operate at the basest of intellectual levels. They are also the ones who will blindly obey any laws enacted by government, whether these imperceptibly erode their liberties, or require their reporting neighbors to secret police.

There are also Americans – some misguided, some ideologues – who work every day of the week in the cause of compromising our liberties. They are just as dangerous and criminal as those who would stifle any of the liberties contained in the Bill of Rights.

I suppose suggesting that we shoot them wouldn’t be taken very well – although that is precisely what it came down to 236 years ago.

What a Difference A Year (and an Election) Makes

What Newt Gingrich you get - the seemingly reasonable conservative commentator or the egotistical bomb-throwing partisan - seems to be determined by whether or not there is an election on the horizon. 

When he is not running for office and there are no elections at stake, Gingrich likes to present himself as a reasonable, rational conservative who is attuned to reality, leading to comments like this new one where he says the GOP has to adjust to changing opinions on marriage equality:

On gay marriage, meanwhile, Gingrich argued that Republicans could no longer close their eyes to the course of public opinion. While he continued to profess a belief that marriage is defined as being between a man and a woman, he suggested that the party (and he himself) could accept a distinction between a "marriage in a church from a legal document issued by the state" -- the latter being acceptable.

"I think that this will be much more difficult than immigration for conservatism to come to grips with," he said, noting that the debate's dynamics had changed after state referenda began resulting in the legalization of same-sex marriage. "It is in every family. It is in every community. The momentum is clearly now in the direction in finding some way to ... accommodate and deal with reality. And the reality is going to be that in a number of American states -- and it will be more after 2014 -- gay relationships will be legal, period."

Now compare that to the bomb-throwing Gingrich who ran for president last year and did all he could to gin up Religious Right support for his campaign by calling for a Constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage on the grounds that it is a perfect example of "the rise of paganism" and a "fundamental violation of our civilization":

So you'll have to forgive us if we're a bit skeptical of this apparent change of heart, coming from a thrice-married serial adulterer who ran for president as a champion of traditional marriage and family values.

Andrea Lafferty Cites CT School Shooting to Rally Opposition to Non-Discrimination Policies

Andrea Lafferty of the Traditional Values Coalition used the school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, in order to bolster her campaign against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act over the bill’s protections for LGBT employees. While speaking to Janet Mefferd yesterday about the Orange County, Florida, school system’s new non-discrimination policy that is similar to ENDA, Laffery 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.”

ENDA, the bill itself as I have been talking about it won’t become law, but they’re going to piece meal it. They’re going to start by making federal contractors—if you want to be a plumber for the government or want to do this, that or the other with the government, you have to comply with this order. They make try and find other ways of doing it, implementing the whole ENDA but I’m not sure exactly how at this point. But what I think people should focus on is: what does this mean locally?

People are really upset because of this tragedy up in Connecticut and protecting our children and we’re going to see some devastating effects. What they did in Florida is they passed a measure which affects adults, teachers, staff and kids. Our concern is that transgender children in schools are a different issue than teachers and staff. What we’re going to see is people with some real issues playing out their personal problems in the classroom.

Like other Religious Right activists who have warned that ENDA will lead to sexual assault and death, 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.”

Lafferty 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.

Lafferty: I fully expect that depending on how the administration pushes this, we’re going to see people applying for jobs at Chick-fil-A and Christian businesses because families go there because A) the food is good and B) they want to support what Chick-fil-A stands for, and no better way of hurting a Chick-fil-A restaurant than to have a bunch of weirdos working there.

Mefferd: That is so weird you say that because I had an experience like that at Chick-fil-A just a couple of weeks ago, exact same experience. I thought: that’s very strange that this person is working at Chick-fil-A.

Lafferty: They may have chosen to hire this person but they’re going to be forced to.



Lafferty: I think minorities, those protected classes, are going to be shocked when they find out that a transgendered man or woman is going to be treated the same as an African American man or woman. That’s not right and the laws will be overridden if ENDA should pass. That’s why they are going jurisdiction by jurisdiction to try and force communities to accept this. This is the ultimate act of self-hatred and we are lifting this up? We should be giving them special medical treatment maybe.

Mefferd: Get them some help.

Lafferty: Not protected class [status].

Roy Moore: Evolution and Gay Marriage Incompatible with the Constitution

Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice-elect Roy Moore appeared on City On A Hill Radio to lash out at marriage equality and the theory of evolution, warning that they undermine the Constitution. Moore, who has argued that same-sex marriage leads to divine punishment and will “destroy this country,” maintained that the Founding Fathers “would be up in arms” over President Obama’s endorsement of marriage equality as it will “destroy the very foundation” of America.

What we’re doing in this country is—if Washington and Jefferson and Madison, name one, if they were alive today would be up in arms. None of them, federalists or antifederalists, never believed that it would come to this. Those that were for big government like Hamilton, Washington, Adams would never have believed that our courts would be doing what they’re doing today, that people would be trying to change the definition of marriage. We don’t take a moment just to stop and clear our eyes and our ears and think: what is happening when a President of the United States can get up and say we need to redefine marriage? You know, when they do that they are attempting to destroy the very foundation on which this country was built.

Moore also denied the theory of evolution and said it was warping people’s understanding of the Constitution by covering up its Biblical precepts. “Evolution has so distorted our way of thinking,” Moore said, “we know we were created but they say we evolved from whatever, something out of the ocean, you’ve got to understand that evolution affects your mental processes.” He explained that evolution makes people think that they are “smarter” than their predecessors while the Constitution shows that “human nature doesn’t change.”

Barbara Moore: Judge Moore I want to ask you, as you read the United States Constitution you can see that biblical concepts and precepts are within that Constitution, everything from separation of powers because of the sinful nature of man, and I would think that any Bible believing Christian would feel that when they look at our United States Constitution, wouldn’t you say?

Roy Moore: I think they don’t and I think there’s a reason they don’t and I think the reason like you see it maybe because you’ve studied a little bit but I think it’s not evident to those who have lost the knowledge of God. What I mean to say by that is you know we started by teaching history at the beginning of the program and it’s like going to football games and seeing who wins and who loses and going to football games and forgetting the rules. If you know the rules it makes the game more interesting because you know there is some way they get to the end of the game and win or lose and you got to go by the rules. We’re not going by the rules because we don’t think the rules matter anymore.

Evolution has so distorted our way of thinking. It’s not just about where we came from. Of course, we know we were created but they say we evolved from whatever, something out of the ocean, you’ve got to understand that evolution affects your mental processes. When you think you have evolved then you think you’re better than those who have gone before you. If you’re better than those who have gone before you then you won’t make the same mistakes, you won’t think the same way, you know better, you’re smarter. The point is, human nature doesn’t change and human nature is what the Constitution sought to restrain.
Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious