Fighting the Right

If You Could Refrigerate Homosexuality, It Wouldn't Be A Sin

Last week, Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality hosted Oklahoma pastor James Taylor (no, not the musician) to discuss a summit they attended about health care and the LGBT community. They were upset about a pamphlet handed out at the conference which compared the Old Testament’s prohibition of homosexuality to its rules against eating certain foods, both of which are categorized as “abominations” in Leviticus.

Taylor said that thanks to “refrigeration” it is no longer a sin to eat foods like pork or shellfish, while since there is no equivalent to refrigeration for homosexuality, it remains a sin. He claimed the people who are really trying to “pick and choose” biblical principles are gay-affirming Christians.

LaBarbera: The first thing on the pink sheet says, it takes Leviticus 18:22, ‘You shall not lie with a male as with a woman, it is an abomination,’ Leviticus 20:13, ‘If a man lies with a man as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination and they should be put to death.’ The analysis put forth by this Kathy McCallie of the Church of the Open Arms said that ‘these verses are part of a law code listing this that are forbidden, however, according to Leviticus it is also sinful to eat pork, shrimp, clams or oysters, these texts cannot be used to condemn homosexual behavior unless one is prepared to condemn all these behaviors.’ So they are trying to mix that in, comment on that James.

Taylor: There’s a couple problems with that. Some things are cultural and there are also some things that have happened now in terms of refrigeration and health concerns and those are some of those things that are there. But the reality is it doesn’t change the fact that God has said a man shall not lie with a male like a woman and vice versa and he uses the word abomination, which is the strongest word in the Bible for hate that you can come across. So that’s the problem, they want to pick and choose what they want to have and then to dismiss it as this isn’t what the Bible says, it’s foolishness.

LaBarbera also criticized the conference for engaging in smoking and drug abuse prevention work while also “promoting homosexuality and even gender confusion.”

LaBarbera: How ironic that a conference that’s supposed to be about substance abuse actually promoted a behavior which leads to disease.

Taylor: It promoted criminal behavior and they were given false information about the reliability of condoms.

LaBarbera: I was walking around at that conference and I remember a table, I took a picture of it, with a bunch of pamphlets about smoking. It’s just bizarre to see them all concerned about preventing smoking because that’s dangerous and yet they are promoting homosexuality and even gender confusion, promoting these awful sex changes where the body is mutilated to become something you cannot be, the other sex.

Taylor said that gays and lesbians should expect to face “resistance” over their “choice” to “live that lifestyle,” while LaBarbera commended “ex-gays” like DL Foster for showing that homosexuality is “changeable.”

Taylor: If you want to be that type of—live that lifestyle, that’s your choice. If you are going to swim upstream, you better expect there to be some resistance. If you are going against what is the norm per se, there’s going to be some type of resistance.

LaBarbera: I just find it fascinating and I know it makes homosexual activists nervous because, and a lot of them will say ‘no it’s not really analogous,’ but the underlying assumption is that we have something to be ashamed of and we don’t. Homosexual behavior is wrong, it’s changeable, we know that, there are many people, people like DL Foster, now here’s a black man who can never change his skin color but the changed his homosexual behavior.

PFAW: Filibuster Reform Provides Only Modest Relief for Ending ‘Unprecedented GOP Obstruction’

WASHINGTON – People For the American Way called the filibuster reform deal set to be announced by Senators Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) only a modest step in addressing the extraordinary GOP abuse of Senate rules.  Among the provisions of the expected reform deal are a rule addressing filibusters of the motion to proceed to legislation and a rule reducing the maximum post-cloture debate for district court nominations to two hours from thirty.

“It’s important that we as a country acknowledge the need to address the unprecedented obstruction undermining the Senate’s ability to do its work,” said Marge Baker, Executive Vice President of People For the American Way. “Americans elect members of Congress to do their jobs and solve the pressing issues facing the country.  That’s not possible when one party is committed to mindless obstruction.”

People For the American Way has long documented the harm this obstruction causes to our judicial system. As detailed in PFAW’s recent memo, “Empty Courtrooms in Obama’s First Term: A Slow Start on Judicial Nominations Magnified Many Times Over By Republican Obstruction,” Senate Republicans have blocked the nomination and confirmation of federal judicial nominees at an unprecedented rate during President Obama’s first term, leading to record vacancy levels in the federal courts.  While there were 55 vacancies when President Obama took office, that number leapt to 90 during his first year and has rarely dropped below 90 since then. As the second term begins, there are over 100 vacancies.

“While these reforms will offer some relief against the persistent obstruction, they fall far short of what is necessary to fix the problem,” Baker continued.  “Limiting the time that votes on district court nominees can be delayed after cloture is invoked is important, but the problem extends far beyond the district court level.  We are disappointed, in particular, that the party leaders were unable to agree on reforms that would prevent needless delay of confirmation votes for critically important circuit court nominations when 60 senators have already voted to end a filibuster.  With four long-pending circuit court nominations held up for months – two since March, one since April, and one since June – and denied a vote even during the lame duck, this does not bode well for how Republicans intend to treat President Obama’s circuit court nominees during the 113th Congress.”
                                                                                      
Beyond judicial nominations, obstruction impacts the Senate’s entire legislative agenda.  During President Obama’s first term, the number of motions to prevent bills from being openly debated reached a historic high. Republicans are now abusing procedural tactics to impede even the most routine functions of government.

“It’s time for Senate Republicans to understand how impatient the American people have become with their tactics blocking progress on a variety of issues critical to our country’s wellbeing,” said Baker.  “These reforms take modest steps in that direction, but we will continue to be vigilant in fighting this needless obstruction.”

###
 

Religious Right Angry over 'Dangerous' Decision to End Ban on Women in Combat

While the Religious Right reacted with apoplectic rage following the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, the lifting of the ban on women in combat has brought dejected but relatively subdued responses from conservatives.

American Family Association spokesman Bryan Fischer, who in December spoke out in favor of the ban by lying about the Israeli military’s policy on women in combat, tweeted that the decision was part of Obama’s plan to “feminize and weaken the U.S. military.”

Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness said that “lives could be lost unnecessarily” by the new policy, which “will harm men and the mission of the infantry as a whole.” “The administration has a pattern of irresponsible actions like this using the military to advance a social agenda,” she said, “This kind of a social experiment is a dangerous one.”

Faith and Freedom Coalition head Ralph Reed maintained that the Obama administration is “putting women in combat situations is the latest in a series of moves where political correctness and liberal social policy have trumped sound military practice.”

Richard Viguerie’s group claimed that “Obama’s plan to introduce women into frontline combat roles in the U.S. military is a dangerous and irresponsible social experiment, not an opportunity for women to serve their country and advance in their chosen profession.”

Radio talk show host Janet Mefferd on her Facebook page wrote that the move is further proof that the Obama administration is “intent upon undoing this great country” and will “stop at nothing to achieve it.”

Family Research Council vice president Jerry Boykin, who was reprimanded by President Bush after he made anti-Muslim and political speeches while in uniform, called the decision “another social experiment”:

The people making this decision are doing so as part of another social experiment, and they have never lived nor fought with an infantry or Special Forces unit. These units have the mission of closing with and destroying the enemy, sometimes in close hand-to-hand combat. They are often in sustained operations for extended periods, during which they have no base of operations nor facilities. Their living conditions are primal in many situations with no privacy for personal hygiene or normal functions. Commanders are burdened with a very heavy responsibility for succeeding in their mission and for protecting their troops.

This decision to integrate the genders in these units places additional and unnecessary burdens on leaders at all levels. While their focus must remain on winning the battles and protecting their troops, they will now have the distraction of having to provide some separation of the genders during fast moving and deadly situations. Is the social experiment worth placing this burden on small unit leaders? I think not.

Penny Nance of Concerned Women for America said that the “majority of women” don’t care about the ban or want its elimination:

News of Defense Secretary Leon Panetta's intent to lift the long-standing ban on women serving in direct combat is further proof that this administration simply does not care about the issues about which the majority of women care. Once again, their interest on women issues is driven by special interest groups. The point of the military is to protect our country. Anything that distracts from that is detrimental. Our military cannot continue to choose social experimentation and political correctness over combat readiness. While this decision is not unexpected from this administration, it is still disappointing. Concerned Women for America (CWA) and its more than half-a-million members around the country will continue to do all we can to see that our men and women in uniform are governed with the respect and resources needed to do the hard task of fighting for and protecting our freedoms.

“God help us,” lamented Denny Burk of the Southern Baptist Convention, who seemed to suggest that women shouldn’t be in the armed forces at all:

Are the fortunes of women in our country really enhanced by sending them to be ground up in the discipline of a combat unit and possibly to be killed or maimed in war? Is there a father in America who would under any circumstance risk having his daughter shot or killed in battle? Is there a single husband in this country who thinks it okay for his wife to risk being captured by our enemies? To risk becoming a prisoner of war? Is this the kind of people we want to be? Perhaps this is the kind of people we already are. I would sooner cut off my arm than allow such a thing with my own wife and daughters. Why would I ever support allowing someone else’s to do the same? Why would anyone?

What kind of a society puts its women on the front lines to risk what only men should be called on to risk? In countries ravaged by war, we consider it a tragedy when the battle comes to the backyards of women and children. Why would we thrust our own wives and daughters into that horror? My own instinct is to keep them as far from it as possible. Perhaps this move makes sense with an all volunteer force, but what if the draft is ever reinstituted? Are we really going to be the kind of people who press our wives and daughters to fight in combat?



Everyone in America ought to be scandalized by this news, but I’m wondering if it will even register on the radar of anyone’s conscience. To the extent that it doesn’t, we reveal just how far gone we are as a people. God help us.

Aaron Ahlert of FrontPageMag said the move is “sure to have deadly consequences” and represents the Obama administration “forcing gender radicalism down America’s throat.”

It didn’t take long for the Obama administration to advance a pernicious piece of its promised radical agenda. Two days after the president laid out his far-left vision during the inauguration, senior defense officials announced that Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta will lift the military’s ban on women serving in combat. The move overturns a 1994 provision that prohibited them from being assigned to ground combat units. Panetta has given the various service branches until 2016 to come up with exemptions, and/or make any arguments about what roles should still reman closed to women. Thus, another bit of gender radicalism has been shoved down the nation’s throat through executive fiat — and this one is sure to have deadly consequences.

...

It stretches the bounds of credulity to believe that sexual tension, regardless of the legitimate or illegitimate motivation behind it, would be lessened under front line, life-threatening combat conditions. Nor is it inconceivable to think that close personal relationships of a sexual nature would make some soldiers take the kind of unnecessary risks to save a lover that might not only endanger themselves, but their entire unit.

...

Once again, elections have consequences. Barack Obama has made it clear that part of his progressive agenda includes forcing gender radicalism down America’s throat, absent any input from Congress. Once, the United States military was all about projecting lethal power around the globe to protect America’s interests. Now, it is all about promoting diversity, inclusion and equality of outcome, irrespective of military readiness and cohesion. For progressives, who have elevated political correctness above all else–national security included–such radical egalitarianism is cause for celebration. For Donnelly and countless other Americans, it is anything but. “No one’s injured son should have to die on the streets of a future Fallujah because the only soldier near enough to carry him to safety was a five-foot-two 110-pound woman,” she contends.

New York Times Investigates Relationship Between American Dominionists and Uganda

Earlier this week, The New York Times posted an excerpt from a new Roger Ross Williams documentary on how the Religious Right in the U.S. is shaping anti-gay activism in African countries like Uganda. The documentary includes interviews with International House of Prayer (IHOP) leaders Lou Engle and Mike Bickle, whom we have followed closely here at Right Wing Watch, along with footage of IHOP missionaries at work in Uganda.

Engle organizes the anti-choice and anti-gay The Call rallies, which regularly feature Republican and Religious Right leaders. In 2010, he brought The Call to Uganda to help promote the Anti-Homosexuality Bill, which would have made homosexuality a capital offense. (He later backpedaled after facing scrutiny.)

IHOP, including many The Call figures, helped to organize Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s 2011 The Response prayer rally, which Bickle emceed.

In the film, Episcopal priest Kapya Kaoma makes a reference to Seven Mountains Dominionism, the belief that fundamentalist Christians have a mandate to take control of the seven major spheres of society: government, business, education, media, arts and entertainment, the family and the church. As Engle explains, there are “seven mountains of influence” that right-wing Christians must “reclaim” in order to win over society.

Engle and Bickle are also key players in the New Apostolic Reformation, a movement of self-appointed prophets and apostles who believe they are spokesmen for God on Earth. Bickle has claimed that gay people are the targets of “flaming missiles” from Satan and has warned that the “gay marriage agenda” is a sign of the End Times as it is “rooted in the depths of Hell.” At one IHOP service, Bickle also claimed that Oprah Winfrey is the harbinger of the Antichrist:

In 2008, Engle held massive rallies to encourage Californians to pass Proposition 8, which banned marriage equality, arguing that legalizing same-sex marriage “will unleash a spirit more demonic than Islam, a spirit of lawlessness and anarchy, and sexual insanity will be unleashed unto the earth.” His rallies have focused on creating a “movement” of ex-gays to stop a Satanichomosexual tornado” that will “destroy America.” (He specifically targeted Ellen DeGeneres for “conversion.”) In addition, he has warned that the separation of the separation of church and state and gay rights are putting the U.S. on the path to Nazism:

While Engle and Bickle have extended their influence to nations like Uganda in order to export their anti-gay politics, they have continued to increase their clout in America’s Religious Right.

Erik Rush Warns We Will All Soon 'Bow to Communist Overlords'

It can’t be easy, but conservative commentator Erik Rush is still finding ways to out-crazy himself. Rush has previously contended that President Obama is staging massacres like Sandy Hook, stoking gun violence and inciting civil unrest in order to secretly murder gun owners, put Americans in concentration camps, implement martial law, cancel the next elections and hand over power to China.

In his latest column for WorldNetDaily, Rush details a new theory that Obama is purging the military leadership in order to make it easier for him to murder U.S. citizens as part of a communist autocoup. Rush then ends his screed by lamenting that no one is taking him seriously.

Americans have lived in relative safety and comfort for a very long time. It has been nearly 70 years since the nation operated in a modality that was geared toward its very survival, such as in the two World Wars. None of the military escapades in which we’ve since engaged possessed the gravity of those, and economically we have not suffered a calamity since the Great Depression matching that period.

Other nations cannot say the same. There are developed nations on the globe that can account for 100 million people having been murdered by their governments or in civil wars within the same 70 years. In undeveloped nations, the history is even bloodier and more bizarre, particularly if you include starvation deaths.

There are those in America who believe that the United States is long overdue for such upheaval, even deserving of same. In the 1960s and 1970s, radicals like President Obama’s mentor Bill Ayers and his Weather Underground comrades plotted America’s downfall, toying with estimations of how many millions of Americans they would have to kill to adequately pacify those remaining. This is not hearsay; it is a matter of public record. This methodology is boilerplate Marxism, in which Obama and key members of his Cabinet are well-versed, despite the benevolent representation of them maintained by the press.



The questions remain: How, then, is America’s karmic comeuppance to come about, and by what manner do Marxist operatives in our government intend to pacify those patriots who won’t bow to communist overlords?

As indicated, China will have a role to play, under the pretext of trade and debt satisfaction. Disarming the populace is also an integral part of the plan, which is why efforts to neutralize the Second Amendment are in play. Naturally, it will be far easier for a well-armed contingent of trained Chinese military scattered about the country to suppress an unarmed citizenry. China definitely has the personnel to spare, and some of the aforementioned Chinese companies reportedly have airfields on their campuses. I kid you not.

But infiltrators from Communist China certainly won’t be the only problem. As one may have noticed, Obama has also taken great pains to cull certain high-ranking American military leaders. While this may appear to be business as usual, I have good reason to believe that some have been released due to their disagreement with the administration over new policies of domestic engagement.

A number of orchestrated catastrophic catalysts intended to move the program into its next and most accursed phase remain on the table. Any of these would ignite full-blown domestic unrest.

What I’ve described would, of course, make Obama a veritable devil behind the most elaborate mask ever devised. It is altogether possible that history will regard him in precisely that way, barring his wholesale success in manifesting these designs, in which case he will be revered as America’s founders were once upon a time, or perhaps at the level of a religious figure.

Personally, I have counted Obama as a devil for a long time. I was fortunate enough to have commenced my study of him before most, and I can find few things more contemptible than his being able to look America in the eye (as it were) and quote the founders as well as Scripture, having done what he has done – not to mention what he has in store.

While the scenario I relate remains incomprehensible even to a goodly number of Obama detractors, the direct and circumstantial evidence is overwhelming. Logically, it just isn’t that difficult to surmise that someone who grew up infused with a hatred for America and admiring history’s greatest serial murderers, and who is a malignant narcissist himself, might perceive it as his destiny to outdo them all.

Fischer: Abortion Rights Will Lead to Terrorist Attacks

Yesterday on Focal Point, American Family Association spokesman Bryan Fischer marked the anniversary of Roe v. Wade by predicting that America “will have to pay” for legal abortion: “It could be through civil war, it could be through anarchy, it could be through Muslim fundamentalists and terrorists attacks on the United States, but one way or another we cannot escape God’s justice.”

He went on to argue that Planned Parenthood clinics are no different from Nazi death camps. “You see a Planned Parenthood clinic, just think Birkenau, just think Auschwitz, just think Bergen-Belsen,” Fischer said, “because that’s what you are looking at, you are looking at an equivalent of a Nazi gas chamber.”

Watch:

Later, he repeated the false charge that Planned Parenthood promotes domestic abuse to its members.

Just like other conservative leaders, Fischer never found time to watch the video he is so angry about. If he did he would learn that it’s a British anti-violence video that uses an intentionally misleading title to deliver the real message: “Don’t cover it up.”

Glenn Beck's Conspiracy Theory Conspiracy Theory

Something truly confounding is happening over at Glenn Beck's studios as he has recently become a crusader warning about the dangers of conspiracy theories despite the fact that his shows are a repository of insane conspiracy theories on an almost daily basis.

In fact, seeing conspiracies everywhere is so ingrained in Beck's worldview that even while attacking conspiracy theories like those involving the Sandy Hook shooting, Beck cannot help but see these conspiracy theories themselves as part of a larger conspiracy designed to distract people from the "real" conspiracies that exist all around them, claiming that it why the White House was constantly pushing the "Birther" conspiracy theory:

Anti-Choice Activist Wants State to Prosecute Women Who Have Abortions

Steve Deace yesterday invited Michael Peroutka, the right-wing activist and 2004 third party candidate for president, onto his radio show for a weekly special with him about the Constitution. Marking the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, Peroutka said that the anti-choice movement should begin to use different and more extreme tactics.

After arguing that Roe doesn’t have any impact on the law because it violates the Bible and merely affected “Jane Roe” alone, he said that local officials should begin prosecuting women for murder if they have an abortion.

For forty years now we’ve been wrapped around the axil spinning our wheels and good people, I mean them no disrespect, trying to overturn Roe v. Wade, trying to get a court or get other justices appointed or blah blah blah, that’s not the answer to Roe v. Wade. The answer to Roe v. Wade is for us as a culture and all the state prosecutors and all the local district and state attorneys to recognize that that’s murder and it was not changed in its category from murder by what the Supreme Court said in Roe v. Wade in January 22, 1973, it wasn’t changed a bit. It was murder then, it was murder before then, it is murder now, it always will be murder and it should be prosecuted.

That’s what people like Cal Zastrow and his family, my friend Cal Zatrow, my friend Les Riley and their families in Mississippi are working right now to try to close the last abortion clinic in Mississippi. That’s the approach that I think needs to be taken but in order for that to be taken we as Americans have to know what law is and what law isn’t.

Cal Zastrow is the co-founder of Personhood USA, which seeks to pass blanket bans on abortion and certain forms of birth control in state constitutions, and Les Riley is the head of Personhood Mississippi and the state’s Constitution party. Like Peroutka, Riley has ties to white supremacist and separatist groups. In 2011, Mississippi voters handily defeated the proposed personhood amendment but now the government is trying to close the state’s sole abortion clinic through regulations.

Thanks to RWW reader Matt for the tip.

Wilson: Obama's Mention of Stonewall 'Sent Shivers Down the Spines of a Lot of People'

The good folks over at the American Family Association were none-too-pleased with President Obama's inaugural address on Monday, in particular his inclusion of non-Christians and gays, and Buster Wilson was likewise outraged by the speech, especially Obama's mention of Stonewall which "sent shivers down the spines of a lot of people and for good reason":

WND Poll Finds Americans Oppose Second Term for Obama… Months After Reelecting Him

The pollster Wenzel Strategies had several entertaining and off the mark polls in the last election, which comes as no surprise as Wenzel is the chief pollster for the always-buffoonish WorldNetDaily. The firm’s latest survey for WND finds that American voters have already lost faith in President Obama’s leadership just days into his second term.

Wenzel claims that Americans had “a despondent reaction to his re-election and the in-your-face attitude that the White House has adopted” towards Republicans, and oppose his political agenda along with his “callous disregard for the massive problems that are about to destroy our nation.” Thanks to Obama, people are now apparently afraid of the country breaking apart or falling into dictatorship and tyranny.

“This finding is undoubtedly a reflection of the belief among most Americans that their leader has lost his way. Or maybe they just think that he doesn’t believe in America as that shining city on a hill, and so have lost their hope in their own country. It could very well be, at least for some, a despondent reaction to his re-election and the in-your-face attitude that the White House has adopted in dealing with the Congress in general, Republicans in Washington in particular, and Obama’s callous disregard for the massive problems that are about to destroy our nation,” Wenzel said.

“His first solution to every problem is to increase government spending and regulation, which Americans have consistently rejected. A majority still opposes Obamacare, and a majority opposed TARP and auto bailout. The idea that the nation may well have passed the point of no return in many areas may well be behind this shocking poll finding.”

Another section of the same poll revealed that there is a “shocking willingness” on the part of Americans to give up their privacy and freedoms for the sake of “safety.” It showed that while 61 percent say domestic drones violate privacy rights, 20 percent of the people are just fine with the idea. Further, 46 percent said local governments should use cameras to monitor traffic.

In related research, Wenzel also found that one in seven Americans sees a dictator in the nation’s future, and another one in five says it eventually will break up into several sovereign regions. The survey revealed that more than one in four believe the United States likely will collapse not just in their lifetime, but in the next decade.

Also, Wenzel earlier revealed that the seeds of tyranny already are present in America, with a heavily armed law enforcement presence and a population holding a disbelief that their government could do anything that would make them want to revolt.

If only there was a way that people could either vote to retain the President or elect a different candidate in his place!

Lapin: It is 'Anti-Social Behavior' for People to Choose Not to Have Children

Rabbi Daniel Lapin was the guest on "WallBuilders Live" today where he discussed "the health benefits of attending synagogues and churches." During the conversation with co-host Rick Green, Lapin made the case that God designed people to interact and thus social connections were integral to good health, which is why people ought to regularly attend religious services.

That prompted Green to complain that under President Obama's "socialized medicine," states where people frequently attend church and are therefore healthier will end up having to "foot the bill" for all the states where people don't attend church. 

That observation struck Lapin as quite insightful, who then offered his own bizarre theory that people who don't have children are "anti-social" because they are forcing other people's children to take care of them:

Green: If you are in a society and culture that has that connection and that places a high value on religion and affiliation there and you get the better health that results, it looks like now, the way that America is going with socialized medicine, those states that are like that are going to end up footing the bill for the states that choose the other path, which is less connection and less affiliation with religion and those things because they are going to have a higher health bill.  But now, with socialized medicine, we'll pay for it.

Lapin: Oh, absolutely.  And by the way, that is also true of Social Security.  It's all very well people choose not to have children; not only do they pay a health penalty for that but the truth is that your children and mine are going to have to pay for them. People say "it's not true, I have my investments to take care of me, I don't need children." Well, that may be true, however your investments depend on a growing market of customers because your investments are in company and what characterizes a profitable company is that it has customers; it's customer are my children.

Green: Yeah, that's a good point, I hadn't even thought about that. If you don't have children, first of all, they are not contributing to the overall marketplace but also the tax base and everything else.

Lapin: That is exactly right.  So I really do think that a claim of anti-social behavior can be lodged at the door of people who choose not to have children.

PFAW Urges Congress to Pass Reauthorization of Violence Against Women Act

WASHINGTON – People For the American Way today praised members of the House and Senate for reintroducing a reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, which House Republicans allowed to expire at the end of last year.

“Democrats in Congress are right to keep pushing until this bill becomes law,” said Minister Leslie Watson Malachi, Director of African American Religious Affairs at People For the American Way. “VAWA was passed and reauthorized twice with broad bipartisan support, and has succeeded for 18 years in making women safer. It’s absolutely shameful that Republicans blocked a routine reauthorization of the law. Fighting domestic abuse and sexual assault should be bipartisan priorities.”

“Tea Party Republicans are jeopardizing the safety of all Americans because they object to protections for LGBT people, immigrants and Native women,” continued Malachi. “This extremist obstruction must stop.”

###
 

Troy Newman Compares Planned Parenthood Fight to World War II, Underground Railroad

Operation Rescue head Troy Newman appeared on The Janet Mefferd Show yesterday to discuss the anniversary of Roe v. Wade and new tactics to recriminalize abortion and fight Planned Parenthood, making sure not to mention the growing support for Roe. Newman said that Operation Rescue and other anti-choice groups must act like the allied bombers who destroyed Nazi arms factories during World War II.

Newman: I’ll give you a little analogy; in 1943 the allied forces sent 1,500 bombers into Germany to destroy the ball-bearing factories and the aviation factories because they knew without ball-bearings they couldn’t produce armaments and methods to destroy the allied forces. So I want to diminish the enemy’s ability to make war on children and I’ve got several plans we’ll be talking about but that that’s the idea. They are going to be well-funded, they are going to be governed by the most radical pro-abortion president ever and the Supreme Court but we’re going to be going after their ability to make war on children.

He also compared the Operation Rescue demonstrations, which have been linked to violence, to abolitionists working in the Underground Railroad and called on activists to channel Gideon, whose 300-man army destroyed the Midianites in the Book of Judges. “I think I told you on a previous radio show, I got tired of going to jail,” Newmain said, “it’s the abortionists that need to go to jail.”

Newman: We peacefully came and laid down our lives and they asked us to leave, ‘Get out that door, go away, get off this property,’ we’d say, ‘I’m sorry I cannot in good conscience get up because if I do the abortionist will come in and he will kill children. So they beat us up and they threw us in jail and they sued us into oblivion and then they passed a federal law to make it a federal crime, a lot like the Fugitive Slave Act. If you were running the Underground Railroad you could face federal time for harboring slaves.

Mefferd: And the RICO lawsuit, the racketeering, it was supposed to be a law used to go after the mob and they started using it against pro-lifers. How much did the lawsuit filing by NARAL and NOW and all these groups, how much damage did that do to Operation Rescue and other big pro-life organizations in terms of the strategies you employed?

Newman: For us rescue was going away anyway because of the massive amounts of jail time. I think I told you on a previous radio show, I got tired of going to jail; it’s the abortionists that need to go to jail. So we were changing our tactics anyway. I think what it did to the rest of the pro-life movement is it made them more fearful of the government and what they could possibly do to them then what happened in actuality. At the end of the day, I’m still standing, I’m still rescuing, I’m still more resolved to end this child-killing than I was back then so they just made me a better pro-lifer.

Mefferd: That’s great. We need about 100 million of you, Troy.

Newman: I’d settle for about—Gideon, 300 courageous men in America that will stand up against Planned Parenthood and we will win the day.

Gaffney & McCarthy: Obama 'Contemptuous' of, 'Taking Out a Contract On' Constitution

The Center for Security Policy’s Frank Gaffney and National Review columnist Andy McCarthy were unimpressed with President Obama’s second inaugural address, despite all its references to the Constitution and the Founding Fathers. On yesterday’s edition of Secure Freedom Radio, McCarthy told Gaffney that the president is “taking out a contract on the Constitution as we know it.” Gaffney responded that the president “wrapped himself in a sort of nostalgia for the Constitution” while in fact being “rather contemptuous of it.”

McCarthy: I think what Obama’s trying to do -- and a lot of us who followed his career warned about this back in 2007, 2008 -- is really consummate the ambition of FDR to change the very nation of the American system, and certainly to change the nature of our constitutional framework from a charter of negative liberties, which is the protection of the American people against the adhesions and the extreme maneuvers of government, to basically a contract of the have-nots against the haves with government as the intermediary for demanding what government must do for people. With the big problem with that being, number one, what is your license to take from me, which is certainly not what the country was founded on. And number two, enough is never enough with the left. So even if you were to institute such a system it quickly becomes unsustainable.

Gaffney: Yeah, I take it you don’t mean “contract” in the sense of “taking out a contract” on somebody, but it certainly sounds as though that might be the gist.

McCarthy: It’s certainly taking out a contract, it’s taking out a contract on the Constitution as we know it.

Gaffney: Yeah. Even as we talked about with Dr. Paul Kengor earlier, and even as he wrapped himself in sort of nostalgia for the Constitution, he certainly showed himself to be rather contemptuous of it.

Staver: CIA Nominee John Brennan is 'Indebted to Islam'

As Brian noted last week, anti-Islam activists are gearing up to oppose John Brennan, President Obama’s nominee to head the CIA, for supposedly being too sympathetic to Islam.  Not only is Brennan's ability to speak Arabic of concern to them, but so are comments he made stating that his travels in Islamic countries have taught him about "the goodness and beauty of Islam" and "helped to shape my own world view."

And that sort of attitude is unacceptable to people like Mat Staver who suggests that Brennan's experience with Islam will make him unwilling to go after terrorists, warning that "if our CIA Director has had his worldview shaped by this kind of radical ideology, that should be concerning to every American":

Rand Paul Says Obama's Inaugural Address Alluded to Hugo Chavez

While speaking to Iowa-based conservative radio host Steve Deace, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) said that President Obama’s inauguration speech reminded him of Hugo Chavez. The potential presidential candidate claimed that unlike Obama, he would have included “reverence for the Constitution [and] reverence for our Creator” in his inaugural address, noting that while Obama “didn’t actually literally refer to Chavez” he “referred to a lot of liberal policies.”

Deace: If that was you up on that podium taking the oath of office, what would your inaugural address sound like and how would it contrast or differ from what the President had to say yesterday?

Paul: Well instead of Hugo Chavez you might hear references to Madison and Jefferson. I know he didn’t actually literally refer to Chavez but he referred to a lot of liberal policies. If it were me on that stage what you would hear is reference and reverence for the Constitution, reverence for our Creator and that all of our liberty comes and is endowed by our Creator and reverence for the rule of law. I think what you’d find is that I would talk about how this country can grow again and how we can prosper if we get back to and believe in the fundamentals upon which our country was founded.

Maybe Paul missed Obama’s speech or is simply dishonest, as the very beginning of Obama’s speech includes references to the Constitution, the Creator and the rule of law:

Each time we gather to inaugurate a president, we bear witness to the enduring strength of our Constitution. We affirm the promise of our democracy. We recall that what binds this nation together is not the colors of our skin or the tenets of our faith or the origins of our names. What makes us exceptional – what makes us American – is our allegiance to an idea, articulated in a declaration made more than two centuries ago:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Today we continue a never-ending journey, to bridge the meaning of those words with the realities of our time. For history tells us that while these truths may be self-evident, they have never been self-executing; that while freedom is a gift from God, it must be secured by His people here on Earth. The patriots of 1776 did not fight to replace the tyranny of a king with the privileges of a few or the rule of a mob. They gave to us a Republic, a government of, and by, and for the people, entrusting each generation to keep safe our founding creed.

Mat Staver Accuses Obama of 'Blasphemy' and Hopes for Impeachment

Liberty Counsel head Mat Staver appeared yesterday on Crosstalk where he excoriated President Obama for speaking out in favor of gay equality during his inauguration, and went on to predict that House Republicans will call for his impeachment.

After host Jim Schneider of VCY America recounted pastor Louie Giglio’s decision to withdraw from the inauguration proceedings over an anti-gay sermon, Staver criticized Obama and Episcopal priest Luis Leon for their “unbelievable” and “unprecedented” advocacy of gay rights during the inauguration.

“To swear on Abraham Lincoln’s Bible during the inaugural address is just really blasphemy to do that,” Staver said, “Lincoln stood for principles completely different than this President stood for.”

Staver continued his anti-gay rant by maintaining that Obama is “the most immoral president that we’ve ever had in history” who is “pushing an immorality that is stunning.” He called Obama a “dictatorial president” who “does not like America” or the Constitution and blamed his “[putting] in-your face amoral, immoral and anti-American rhetoric and policies” for a spike in gun sales.

Staver: The next four years are going to be worse than the last four years and today’s inaugural address really sets the tone.

Schneider: And also Mat in the parade that’s going on right now we have the participation of the Gay & Lesbian Band Association in this parade and then Rolling Stone came out reporting a source told them that Lady Gaga is going to be one of the artists performing at a ball for the White House staffers tonight.

Staver: What we have is the President who is not the President of the United States, he is president of the divided states and he relishes in dividing the states among each other. He has this famous speech that he gave during a Democratic convention several years ago when he was a state senator and he talks about ‘there’s not red states and blue states but the United States of America,’ that’s not this President. This President runs to divide people, to divide and conquer and ultimately dismantle and deconstruct. He’s doing that with morality, he’s doing it with marriage, he’s trying to divide and conquer. Really, he is the most immoral president that we’ve ever had in history, pushing an immorality that is stunning.

Schneider: Mat, there is another aspect to this too and it is the Messiah-like image. Have you seen the Newsweek magazine yet? This is a side profile photo of the President with the headline, The Second Coming, it’s a biblical reference to the return of Christ. Keep in mind a couple of years ago they had ‘Obama God of All Things’ on the cover and then there’s another poster that’s being sold by street vendors today which Fox News reports doesn’t have the official endorsement of the White House but features the image of the president in prayer with the headline, ‘Prophecy Fulfilled.’ And of course Mat we won’t forget Jamie Foxx called Obama ‘our Lord and Savior’ recently at some music awards as well.

Staver: You know this kind of Messianic complex that people were putting on him and Obama doesn’t do anything to stop it. They may say that this is not what President Obama endorsed but the President can come out and hit that head on and stop that kind of Messianic complex. We saw it during the first inauguration and the first run for president, now we see it again in the second one. He is not the Messiah.

He is someone who does not like America; he is someone who does not like the fundamental values on which America is based; he doesn’t adhere to the Constitution; he is a dictatorial president that thinks the Constitution is an inconvenience put in his path. He as a President doesn’t work across the aisle, in fact he doesn’t even work with his own party, he doesn’t even invite his own party leaders to Camp David, he is not somebody who wants to get involved and actually solve the problems of the country, he wants to dictate how these things that are very important to all Americans ought to work.

Thus as a result you’re seeing gun sales go up all across America. Why is that? These are law-abiding citizens that are concerned that basic fundamental rights are being taken away from them so the lines are long, they’re just enormous in terms of the crowds that are taking place around the country and it’s because he is agitating the people. He is constantly agitating, constantly putting in-your face amoral, immoral and anti-American rhetoric and policies.

Later, Staver dismissed Obama’s re-election a mere two months ago and said that House Republicans should immediately consider impeaching Obama in order to push back against his policy agenda.

Caller: The founders gave us in the Constitution a means of dealing with people like Barack Obama, it is called impeachment. Staver: Yeah. Caller: We need to get onto our legislators and tell them in no uncertain terms if they want to go back to Washington they better get busy and get rid of this man. He has been incalculated [sic] with hate America from that day he was born.

Schnedier: Appreciate that, let’s quickly talk about impeachment. Mat, the House has to develop the articles; some congressmen have said that if the President does such and so we will initiate that.

Staver: Yeah I would not be surprised if shortly after this second term comes that you will have some impeachment proceedings in the House. He’s just going to push, push, push, push and he’s going to push people over the edge. I think the House will respond and if not we need to make sure that they do respond. That’s what the previous caller was getting at, when they initiated these impeachment proceedings during the Clinton administration and stopped him from doing a lot of the things he otherwise wanted to do in his term of office.

Obama is different from Clinton in many respects because he is more ideologically driven than Clinton, he is more radical than Clinton, it’s amazing when you almost think it would be nice to have Clinton back because he’s radical but he’s not as radical. Obama is the most radical ideologically driven president in history. He will do anything to reach his ideological agenda. He is not a politician and he doesn’t want to compromise, he doesn’t want to reach out to push his agenda. I think we’re going to have to have some very strong push back and impeachment I think is one of those areas.

Obama's Inaugural Address Sends Fischer Off on Another Anti-Gay Rant

It has been awhile since Bryan Fischer went off on a good ol' fashioned anti-gay rant on his radio program, but yesterday's inaugural address by President Obama seems to have set him off.

In his remarks, Obama declared that "our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well" and that did not sit well with Fischer, who proclaimed that "homosexuals do not have a constitutional right to engage in sodomy" any more than people have a right to engage in pedophilia, incest, and bestiality ... and that fact that Obama does not realize this only demonstrates that he is appallingly ignorant of the truth about homosexuality and, as such, is embarrassing himself in front of the entire world:

Barber: If Abortion Were Illegal, AIDS Would Probably be Cured by Now

On today's "Faith and Freedom" radio broadcast, Matt Barber marked the 40th anniversary of Roe v Wade by declaring that AIDS activists ought to be anti-choice because "there is probably a really good chance that whoever it was that was going to find the cure for AIDS ... that that person has already been slaughtered in the womb":

Sandy Rios Mourns Obama's Inauguration and Equality for Non-Christians

American Family Association radio host Sandy Rios yesterday spoke to Religious Right historian Bill Federer on her show where she criticized President Obama for mentioning nonbelievers and non-Christians as having “equal standing” with Christians in the U.S.

“When he lists all these denominations and atheists and Buddhists and Muslims it’s like we’re all equal, of equal proportion, and we are not,” Rios said, once again revealing that the AFA does indeed believe that people who do not subscribe to its version of Christianity are inferior and minority rights should be dictated by the whims of the majority.

Federer agreed and said it was part of Obama’s “intentional denigration of the contributions of Judeo-Christian faith in America’s history” and went on to say that “Obama’s been using the bully pulpit to advance Islam.”

Later, Rios mourned that African-American Christians support Obama even though he is working to “usher in a time of godlessness” and is “radically transforming this country” by including an openly gay poet and a gay band contingent in inaugural festivities. She naturally ended by doubting Obama’s Christian faith and patriotism: “Something is terribly wrong and it’s terribly wrong to see this man swear allegiance to the country on the bibles of men who went before him who were men who understood faith and who God was.”

We are radically transforming this country and it is happening by the first black president, which brings me to another point: today is Martin Luther King’s birthday and that’s something to really celebrate and I think about my black brothers and sisters, especially in Christ, and I think about the irony that the first black president that they are so excited about, and rightfully so, should usher in a time of godlessness. It’s just amazing to me. Isn’t that ironic? I mean that is really one of the most twisted things. The black community has to choose between rejoicing that there’s an African American president for the first time in the nation’s history while understanding in their deep conscience that he’s ushering in things that they live their lives are the opposite of, their passions are the opposite of. It’s a dilemma.



I think ironies of today are just not escaping any of us; it’s very hard, I would be lying if I said otherwise, to celebrate today. But I think it’s very good for us to remember our history, what our founding fathers stood for and there is nothing wrong with reminding each other and fighting to retain it because today does not example that when we have homosexual poet laureates and we have an evangelical pastor who has said that homosexuality was a sin banned from the platform and we have gay bands performing. Something is terribly wrong and it’s terribly wrong to see this man swear allegiance to the country on the bibles of men who went before him who were men who understood faith and who God was, it’s really ironic.
Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious