Fighting the Right

Glenn Beck on Gay Marriage: 'I Don't Care'

Today on his radio program, Glenn Beck declared that he is not opposed to gay marriage, provided that nobody tries to destroy his marriage or his church.  But, Beck claimed, that is exactly what "the Left" is always trying to do, which is why the issue of marriage equality is so controversial:

Bachmann: Obama wants to 'Lift up the Islamists' and Impose Sharia Law

Earlier this year, Rep. Michele Bachmann said that Muslim Brotherhood agents had penetrated the Obama administration, which she claimed was attempting to “enforce Islamic speech codes.” While Bachmann was roundly mocked and criticized for the baseless remarks, they were a hit in conspiratorial right-wing circles. Bachmann took her crusade against the supposed Muslim Brotherhood infiltration of the government to Jan Markell’s radio show this weekend, where she again claimed that Obama is “aiding and abetting” radical Islamist groups.

Markell is an End Times broadcaster and a close ally of Bachmann, who attended her “Understanding the Times” conference this year. She has previously claimed that Mattel’s Little Mommy Cuddle ‘n Coo doll is promoting Islam to children, demanded the government begin monitoring mosques and in 2007 predicted a terrorist attack as a result of a Hindu prayer in the U.S. Senate. Markell has also suggested that a tornado in Minnesota was a “warning from God” meant to punish the Lutheran Church for affirming gay pastors and alleged that the deadly 2011 earthquake in Japan was divine judgment.

Markell charged Secretary of State Hillary Clinton with supporting the Muslim Brotherhood, and Eric Barger said that the supposed rise of Sharia law in the U.S. is proof that the Antichrist is coming.

Markell: Hillary, she’s a woman from Arkansas who used to be an attorney and rose to the White House, why would somebody like Hillary Clinton let herself get embroiled in things that are so Islamic? I’ve done entire programs on her assistant Huma Abedin connected to the Muslim Brotherhood. Why do you think someone like Hillary is getting so enmeshed in all things Muslim Brotherhood that this is absolutely a danger to the nation at this point because of the intricate nature of Muslim Brotherhood, Washington D.C., homeland security, national security, the State Department and the rabbit trails just keep going, and everybody is wondering who has looked into these kinds of issues, what is in the mind of somebody like Hillary Clinton that she is willing to sacrifice the safety of the nation by getting so embroiled in Muslim Brotherhood?

Barger: Jan, it is simply baffling to me. To be honest with you, I’ve thought about that so much and I’ve been living with this research now for several weeks that we’re using on the air. Somebody has her ear, obviously; maybe she is convinced that she can be a catalyst for world peace. You know, if you understand Islam at all you understand that the goal is not world peace, this is world domination, they have said it over and over; it’s in the Koran.



Barger: Can you imagine Sunday sermons across our land soon being scrutinized by a panel by religious examiners to see if the words used pass the left-wing litmus test or the Muslim litmus test or however it’s viewed, to see if they become hate crimes or to see who would be called a renegade preacher is really just inciting his people? That’s where we’re going and eventually that’s the case Antichrist will make against people who disagree with him and who would stand against him and stand against everything that he will stand for. The thought police have now moved to the mouth and I think we need to see that and understand it. How soon will our legal ability to witness and defend the faith and preach the unadulterated Gospel be hampered or stopped? This is the important question, you see.

During the interview, Bachmann warned that Israel and the American people are in grave danger due to President Obama’s purported support of radical Islamists: “President Obama, if you look at nearly every decision he has made about this issue, it is to lift up the Islamists and to take down Israel.”

She also claimed that the Obama administration’s supposed “Islamic speech codes” could be “deadly for the American people.”

Bachmann also told Barger that everyone who is not an Islamist will “lose their right of speech and expression” as there is “no tolerance for dissent or disagreeing in any way with the goals or the beliefs of the Islamists.”

Bachmann: Not just verbal speech, but written, a cartoon, a painting, whatever it is, if it is in any way construed as being against Islam that is where the confrontation comes from the Islamist world and they want to stop anyone in the world from saying anything negative about Islam. Which means there is only one free speech right and that would belong to the Islamists. Everyone else would lose their right of speech and expression.

The reason why this is important is because this is the whole game, it is game over if we who are in the non-Islamist world lose the right to criticize what the Islamist does, because the Islamist tries to advocate Islamic Sharia law and so anything that we would say in the future, once you criminalized anti-Islamic speech, anything that we would say that would be critical in any way of anything Islam does would be considered criminalized. That’s why I say it is game over; the Islamists will have won everything. That’s why they are willing to put ten years into achieving this objective of silencing any form of dissent to Islam.

Barger: That goes right along with the idea that in Islam you are either a member of the house of peace or the house of war, there is no live and let live or peaceful coexistence.

Bachmann: There is no tolerance. There is no tolerance for dissent or disagreeing in any way with the goals or the beliefs of the Islamists, there is only one way.



Bachmann: Once you take away people’s ability to be able to speak, this is not a small right, this is everything, it is game over because then all of the power and authority has been given over to the Islamist. The Islamist is the only one who gets to dictate what we can say and what we can do, and what we can print and what we not print, and who can assembly and how they can assemble, because at that point Sharia Islamic law in effect becomes the law of the land because the Islamist gets to have the authority, not anyone who opposes Islam. This is a very, very important issue.

She accused the Obama administration of supporting the Organization of the Islamic Conference’s advocacy of blasphemy laws, which the U.S. unambiguously opposed. Bachmann said that Americans must study Islamic materials in the same way people studied Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf during WWII and alleged that a letter from Muslim-American groups [PDF] regarding anti-Muslim instructional material is “proof positive” that the Obama administration wants to introduce Sharia law to the U.S.

Bachmann: That’s what I spent my whole year doing was talking about this issue of what the OIC was trying to do with their ten year plan and all of these efforts in the Obama administration. The only conclusion you could make is that they are embracing the ten year plan and are supporting it and that’s why this October 19 document is so important because that is proof positive that every piece that is put into place is leading to one direction, this isn’t deviating it’s leading to one direction, and that ultimate goal it seems to be is to allow for mandating, following, every demand of the Islamist and we know what their ultimate demand is.

Barger: Sharia law.

Bachmann: That’s right. That’s why we need to know what their belief system is; we need to know what they truly believe. That’s why the most important thing a person could do in WWII was to read the book that the leader of Germany wrote.

Barger: Mein Kampf.

Bachmann: Because he laid out very clearly what his intention was, he wasn’t hiding it, the Islamist does the same thing. They do not hide it, they lay it out very clearly. But what we’ve never seen before is the United States aiding and abetting that goal.

Bachmann concluded by making the absurd claim that Obama and Clinton are going to do away with people’s First Amendment rights and “take away the free speech rights of the American people.”

Barger: We know that our Constitution certainly doesn’t match what the OIC and the Muslim Brotherhood want, nor what the United Nations seems to be doing with Resolution 16/18 and with some other things that are going on there. How much should we worry about executive orders and how they might become, instead of the legislation that should be passed through Congress, might become the law of the land that way?

Bachmann: We’ve already seen that President Obama has given himself a very free hand at writing any executive order that he wants because he said it himself that if the United States Congress won’t agree with him, he’ll just take matters into his own hand and he’ll become his own Congress and he’ll sign his own executive order and thereby put into practical effect a law that he wants to see passed. This is completely against our Constitution.

But even more importantly, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton she helped to formulate and write and pass UN Resolution 16/18, which calls for the criminalization—anti-free speech measures. This is very concerning that she went down that road. It doesn’t specifically say Islam, it talks about religious speech, but let’s face it there is only one religion that the OIC—the Organization of Islamic Cooperative [sic]—cares about and that’s Islam. Hillary Clinton was involved from the very beginning in writing this resolution. She’s already signed this. While a UN resolution doesn’t bind United States law, how in the world could the President allow the Secretary of State to sign a resolution that indicates that we are willing to take away the free speech rights of the American people?

This is game over, as I’ve said before, because when you limit the right to dissent from the American people, the Founders made this the First Amendment because they understood this is our most sacred right, our right to speak, our right to practice our faith the way that we want to, the right to publish what we want to publish, the right to assemble and talk about whatever we want to talk about. That’s freedom, that’s the essence of freedom, that’s the First Amendment, and that is what UN Resolution 16/18 which Hillary Clinton signed, presumably with the affirmation of President Obama, and that’s the first step in a big step for taking away from you and me and all of your listeners our right of free speech and expression, religious practice, freedom of assembly, freedom of the printing press but even more importantly, it will empower the Islamist to use that against us.

Either Bachmann never read UN Resolution 16/18 or is simply misrepresenting it, as the resolution [PDF] actually defends the freedom of religion while at the same time expressing “deep concern” over religious intolerance, discrimination and violence.

Human Rights First also debunks the assertion that the resolution somehow curtails freedom of speech:

Myth 1: The U.N. resolution opens the door to limiting freedom of speech.

Wrong. The resolution acknowledges the language of article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), notably that “any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.” It calls on states to take measures “consistent with their obligations under international human rights law, to address and combat such incidents.”

The United States has a reservation to that provision, to the extent that it violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, so it is not bound by the obligation. In fact, the U.S. has the highest threshold of free speech in the world, and the U.S. government has expressed no intention of lowering those standards. However, that does not exempt all other states from their legal obligations to fight “incitement, hostility or violence” according to article 20 of the ICCPR. After all, that is what they signed up to, so they have an obligation by law to honor their commitment.

In all respects though, the implementation of Article 20 must not infringe Article 19, which reasserts everyone’s right to freedom of expression. Rather than imposing new restrictions on freedom of speech, which it does not, the new consensus resolution opens the door to an action-oriented approach to fighting religious intolerance. That is very consistent with the U.S. policies and practices – combat violence, discrimination and hatred without restricting freedom of speech. Resolution 16/18 urges states to train government officials to address religious tensions, to harmonize actions at local and national level, to raise awareness of negative stereotyping of persons, to promote interfaith and intercultural dialogue, to foster religious freedom and to speak out against intolerance (among other recommendations. The only limitation on speech that is in the operative part of the resolution is incitement to “imminent violence”, which is in accordance with US law.

No, Linda Harvey, Marriage Equality Will Not Make Jesus Get Gay Married

Linda Harvey is not happy with the recent vote in Washington state in favor of marriage equality and she is even less happy with the decision by the state to revise its marriage licenses to add an option for "spouse," in addition to "bride" and "groom," allowing those who are getting married to choose which they prefer. 

In Harvey's eyes, this change undermines the "legitimacy of man-woman marriage" and, even worse, creates confusion about the Christian imagery in which Jesus one day returns to earth to marry his "bride": the church.

Well now, even though truth has not changed; marriage is still, in reality, one man and one woman, the voters' decision prompted health department officials to propose a change in language until enough people objected.  The words "bride" and "groom" were going to be replaced with "spouse A" and "spouse B" or "person A" and "person B" on marriage licenses, according to the original proposal.

That's right; on official marriage documents, the words "bride" and "groom" were going to disappear.  When advocates of homosexual marriage say how would two men or two women being allowed to marry change your marriage, here's one way.  Nonsense like this starts showing up and the legitimacy of man-woman marriage is automatically on defense against pretenders to the throne.

...

Homosexuality, far from being marriage, is always a grave sin in Scripture.

Then, speaking of brides and grooms, there's another Christian concept that illustrates the unchanging standard of man and woman as the model for marriage: in the New Testament, Jesus is referred to several times as the "bridegroom." And when he returns, he will return as a bridegroom seeking his bride: the church, which is the body of all believers, also called the Bride of Christ.  It's a beautiful analogy.

What happens to such a concept in a same-sex marriage?  Does Jesus as bridegroom seek another groom?  No, that would be a twisted and frankly offensive spin on a profound and marvelous concept.

As Christians, we must never accept the idea of same-sex marriage.  It certainly doesn't work as sound Christian doctrine and it will be shown before long not to work as revolutionary secular law either.

Wilson Uses Bogus Story to Warn that Liberals Will Put Pastors in Jail

American Family Association’s Buster Wilson yesterday warned that gays and liberals are trying to “elevate hate speech [laws] above the freedoms of our precious first amendment,” citing a case in Canada where he says a “pastor spent 18 months in jail for a sermon he preached against homosexuality.”

As we think about the basics of Biblical morality, today we will discuss the issue of hate speech and the first amendment’s guarantee of freedom of Speech.

While most Americans refuse to believe anyone could ever be imprisoned simply for something they said, the examples of it actually happening are abundant.

In our neighbor to the north, Canada, a local pastor spent 18 months in jail for a sermon he preached about homosexuality. A member complained to the hate speech council and he was found guilty and jailed.

Now for certain, that’s in Canada. But the hate speecher’s in this country are modeling their efforts on those successful hate speech laws in Canada.

The left wants to control the speech of the right, and if left to themselves, they will find a way to elevate hate speech above the freedoms of our precious first amendment!

If a pastor was sentenced to jail for eighteen months in Canada, don’t you think there would be a single news story about it?

We couldn’t find a single one, but Wilson seems to be citing a decision by the Alberta Human Rights Commission which fined a pastor over an anti-gay letter to the editor which preceded an attack on a gay youth. But the ruling was overturned because it violated Canada’s constitutional protection of free speech. Even Canadian Baptist leaders have rebuffed claims that pastors in their country can go to jail over their stance on homosexuality.

So basically, a Canadian judge tosses out a fine against a pastor and reaffirms his free speech rights, but Wilson claims that he “spent 18 months in jail” and therefore hate speech laws are coming to the U.S.!

Barber: Almost Half of Gay Men Were Sexually Assaulted by Pedophiles as Children

When not fighting the "war on Christmas," Mat Staver and Matt Barber continue to fight the California law that bans the use of sexual orientation conversion therapy on minors, which they have now taken to calling "Jerry Sandusky laws" on the grounds that children who are sexually abused will now become gay because they will not be allowed to get therapy to help them deal with the abuse. 

In fact, Barber falsely claimed that almost half of all gay men "were sexually assaulted by a homosexual pedophile" and that abuse is what pushed them into a lifestyle filled with disease, depression, and alcoholism. 

For Staver, the basic goal of laws seeking to ban the use of conversion therapy is simply to force people to accept homosexuality "as good and normal, when it is not":

Young Earth Creationists Still Unhappy with Pat Robertson

Last week, young earth Creationist leader Ken Ham lashed out at Pat Robertson for disputing the belief that Earth is approximately 6,000 years old. Now the American Family Association’s news arm OneNewsNow is out with a story, “Christian Broadcaster Straying From Scripture?” The AFA quotes a member of Ham’s Answers in Genesis skewering Robertson for insisting that humans did not live side-by-side with the dinosaurs:

Dr. Terry Mortenson of Answers in Genesis (AIG), who disagrees with Robertson, notes that the television show host challenges James Ussher, the renowned former archbishop of Ireland who traced the earth's creation based on the Bible and took the Bible as the Word of God.

"[Ussher] came up with a date of 4004 [B.C.] for creation by taking the genealogies in Genesis 5 and 11 as complete chronologies with no missing names, which is the way the church took those genealogies for 1,800 years," Dr. Mortenson explains. "So, he was just being a very, very careful student of the Scriptures and the chronological information given in Scripture."

Moreover, the AIG researcher notes that Robertson's claim that dinosaurs existed before biblical times is illogical, because there is no pre-biblical time; the Bible starts with the creation of the world.

Robertson also mentioned science's reliance on carbon dating, which Dr. Mortenson says reveals Robertson's ignorance on the subject.

"Carbon-14 is never used to date rocks or dinosaur bones; it's other dating methods which have much longer half-lives," Mortenson reports. "The maximum age you could date anything with radio carbon dating is about 80,000 or 100,000 years at the max, and dinosaurs supposedly lived 65 million to 245 million years ago. So he's really not informed on the dating methods."

AIG maintains that the Bible remains the true and final authority on the subject.

Cathie Adams: Obama Needs a Teleprompter 'Because He Fried His Brain on Drugs'

A little over a week before the election, Texas Eagle Forum president Cathie Adams, delivered a presentation at a Grassroots America We The People "Call To Action" meeting where she spoke alongside then-candidate Ted Cruz. 

Adams' presentation was largely based on Mark Levin's book "Ameritopia" as she set out to explain exactly how "Barack Hussein Obama," as she repeatedly referred to him, was using the so-called "green agenda" as cover to implement Marxism in America.  As Adams saw it, talk of "sustainable development" or "social justice" are just code words for Marxism, leading to an odd claim that the conflicts that plague the continent of Africa would end when the people of Africa learn to "turn their hearts toward their creator."

Adams then wondered why people are unwilling to admit that there "is a Marxist in our White House" before declaring that when she saw "someone who thinks so narcissisticly as Barack Hussein Obama [glare] at Mitt Romney in that last debate," it made her "want to go up and just smack his face!"

Finally, Adams warned her audience against thinking that they cannot impose their values on the nation because failing to do so will have dire consequences, saying that the initiative on the ballot in Colorado that legalized marijuana would only make matters worse "because I'm telling you, Barack Hussein Obama has got to have a teleprompter because he fried his brain on drugs":

At last count, I think there were fifteen wars that were on-going in Africa. And yet, the United Nations has been for years, as well has been the UK and I remember much of the American foreign policy being focused on Africa; "we've got to meet the needs of the people in Africa and then there will be no more war." Folks, fifteen wars the last time I counted. The way that they are going to get out of a warring situation is to turn their hearts towards their creator, it is not going to be by having their needs met by any government.

Who is a Marxist in our White House?  Of course, it's Barack Hussein Obama.  And I don't know why we're not calling him what he is as a Marxist.  It's as if, when the wall fell that communism died; it didn't.  Today, it is green on the outside and red on the inside. It is as red as ever and Barack Obama is implementing his green agenda, which is Marxism, and that is exactly why our economy is hurting as badly as it is and why twenty three million people are still out of work. That is exactly what is happening.

So for us to elect a US Senator or elect a President who thinks more of himself than he ought, who thinks so narcissisticly, as Barack Hussein Obama glared at Mitt Romney in that last debate, I was so offended I wanted to go up and just smack his face.

And folks we've got to be very careful about saying "well, that's not for me but you can do whatever you want." Folks, we have a rule of law, we have a Constitution and those things must be upheld.  We cannot think that, well, if what their trying to do, for example, right now on a ballot in Colorado is legalize marijuana.  And if we legalize it, will we empty out our jails and will we be safe for ever more?  No.  I'm telling you, Barack Hussein Obama has got to have a teleprompter because he fried his brain on drugs.

Harvey: Gay Rights Advocates Pushing a 'Lie from the Pit of Hell' and 'Killing our Children'

Anti-gay activist Linda Harvey of Mission America on her radio show this weekend decried a recent LGBT youth conference, PrideWorks, in Westchester, New York, which she said is part of an effort to corrupt children with “pro-homosexual, graphic, explicit, distorted and bizarre information.” “It’s a huge lie from the pit of hell,” Harvey said, insisting that it is “heartbreaking” about how gay rights supporters “are leading our children into sin” and effectively “killing our children.”

The homosexual movement is pitching their movement to our kids. They for some reason are very anxious to sell our children on this. I think part of it is they believe this is the future of their movement if they sell people with misinformation, which is what it largely is at this point, and put conservative values on the defensive, then they will turn a whole generation around. And they are doing it because the hearts of the fathers are not where they need to be, we need to be getting in there and fighting for the truth for our kids. We need to be horrified that busloads of middle schoolers, for instance, are taken to an all-day program in Westchester County, New York sponsored by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network and hear an entire day that they take off school and the school sponsors this of pro-homosexual, graphic, explicit, distorted and bizarre information and it’s government sponsored now.



It’s a huge lie from the pit of hell, folks. We need to tell our children the truth, all of our children, the ones who are so sadly distorting themselves at this point in their lives; they’ve listened to these lies. They are not being told anything about another side, another beautiful, positive, life-enhancing, life-prolonging side and that’s traditional values. It’s not hateful; it is being misportrayed by those who are desperate to hang on to their sin and want to drag children, contrary to what Jesus wanted people to do with children, to drag children into it with them.



We are killing our children, we’re killing their hearts, their spirits, their sensitivity to other people, we are giving them the tools to make it highly likely they will never have a happy, productive marriage in the future if they are already so hardened in their hearts to the beautiful, God-designed function of their bodies. This is heartbreaking, this is absolutely heartbreaking, I get choked up every time I think about how we are leading our children into sin. Jesus said do not lead little ones into sin, and why are we doing this? Why are we not out there fighting for our kids? I urge you to search your hearts and find a way to find it in your time to make a call, make a call on the Heartbeat Bill, make a call to your school and your school board president and make sure they are not allowing pro-homosexual programs in their schools.

Huckabee Organizes National 'Day of Prayer' Campaign the Day Before Obama's Inauguration

Shortly before the election, Mike Huckabee tried to launch a get out the vote effort for conservative Christians modeled on the success he had had earlier in the year with his "Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day."  Given the results of the election, the effort was obviously not very successful ... which is why Huckabee is now launching a similarly formatted "day of prayer" campaign scheduled for the day before President Obama's inauguration:

The elections have ended and although many of us may have desired a different outcome, we cannot change what has happened. However, we can in common cause come together to help heal the deep divisions which threaten the greatness of our nation and the freedoms we hold so dear.

Today I ask you, as a faith leader within your community, to commit to joining me on January 20th for A DAY TO PRAY, a nationwide event to begin the healing of our country.

A DAY TO PRAY isn’t partisan or political, but is a spiritual event where believers from all faiths and walks of life will join together to pray for our selves, our families, our leaders, and our country.

As we have done in the past, let us bring together our friends, our families, and everyone we can reach using our own networks and platforms to advance A DAY TO PRAY and start a healing in this land.

...

Let us stand together with one voice to determine the future of our ONE NATION UNDER GOD ... It is important that we show our unity in this effort so that we will not be dismissed as only a few. We will be heard by Almighty God and he will answer our prayers as He has promised, and we will see a revival in our land.

...

Let me close by sharing one of my favorite quotes, "I have been driven many times to my knees by the overwhelming conviction that I had nowhere else to go."

Abraham Lincoln said this at a time of great tumult for our nation.  While our challenges are different today, receiving God’s forgiveness and wisdom are just as important to the future of our nation.

Washington Times Gives Platform to White Nationalist to Warn Against Puerto Rico Statehood

Earlier this year we reported that CPAC was hosting two panels featuring three prominent white nationalists – Peter Brimelow and John Derbyshire of VDARE and Bob Vandervoort, head of ProEnglish. Vandervoort appeared on an anti-immigration panel and even met with Rick Santorum alongside other conservative leaders.

While ProEnglish focuses on making English the official language of the U.S., the Institute on Research and Education on Human Rights points out that Vandervoort was in charge of a white nationalist organization before heading up ProEnglish.

During that period Vandervoort was at the center of much of the white nationalist activity in the region. While he was in charge, Chicagoland Friends of American Renaissance often held joint meetings with the local chapter of the Council of Conservative Citizens. He also made appearances at white nationalist events outside Illinois, for instance participating in the 2009 Preserving Western Civilization Conference.

Vandervoort’s prized newsletter – American Renaissancewarned about, among other things, the increasing number of “non-whites living in the country.”

Started as a modest newsletter in 1990, American Renaissance has grown into an important vehicle for white nationalist ideas. American Renaissance first described itself as a "literate, undeceived journal of race, immigration and the decline of civility." It claimed that "White people" had lost their voice and that the United States was in danger of losing its "national and cultural core." Capturing the centrality of nativism to white nationalism, American Renaissance founder Jared Taylor wrote in a 2001 AR piece that,

Undoubtedly the greatest threat to whites today comes from immigration. Racial preferences, guilt-mongering, anti-Western education, even anti-white violence are manageable problems compared to a process that is displacing whites and reducing them to a minority. With a change in thinking at the right levels, anti-white policies and double standards could be done away with practically overnight, but that would still leave us with nearly 100 million non-whites living in the country.

But his background as a white nationalist organizer wasn’t a problem for the conservative Washington Times, which gave him a platform to discuss the recent vote in Puerto Rico in favor of statehood.

The commonwealth is predominantly Spanish-speaking. If or when the issue of Puerto Rican statehood goes before Congress in 2013, these task force recommendations need to be considered so Puerto Ricans realize there would be strict English requirements as a condition for admission to statehood. At a minimum, a large majority of Puerto Ricans — who are U.S. citizens — must become fluent in English for statehood to even be considered.



With Puerto Rico’s legislature next year changing over to one that favors the status quo, there will be a new dynamic. It will be up to Puerto Rico’s representative in Congress to offer some sort of statehood legislation, and then the debate could get messy. The spotlight would no doubt shine on how expensive it would be to U.S. taxpayers to admit an economically depressed state to the union.

Leaving the Senate, Jim DeMint is Looking Forward to Working with Glenn Beck

Sen. Jim DeMint called in to Glenn Beck's radio program today to discuss his decision to resign from the Senate to become the president of the Heritage Foundation.  DeMint explained that, with the re-election of President Obama, conservatives were not going to be able "to do anything positive at the federal level for the next four years" so he needed to be somewhere outside of government, working on solutions for when Obama's policies inevitably bring America "to its knees" ... and that will entail partnering with people like Beck to get the message out; a prospect that Beck was very eager to embrace:

Swanson and Ham: Young Earth Creationists at 'Omaha Beach in the War of the Worldviews'

Generations Radio’s Kevin Swanson spoke yesterday with Creation Museum president Ken Ham, who has written a book about how many Christian colleges “are going the way of Yale, Harvard and Princeton” and rejecting young earth creationism.

Ham recently lashed out at televangelist Pat Robertson after Right Wing Watch reported Robertson’s rejection of the idea that the Earth is only 6,000 years old. In his interview with Swanson, Ham accused churches and Christian colleges of “open[ing] the door to allow the philosophy of naturalism, and evolution, millions of years, to permeate into God’s word,” warning, “If we don’t shut that door, we’re going to lose this culture, America will be the England and Europe of tomorrow.”

“As you write this book,” Swanson asked, “Do you get the sense that you are effectively very, very close to Omaha Beach in the war of the worldviews?”

Ham: Evolution, millions of years, he naturalistic philosophy that permeates our education system, that’s really the religion of this age to explain life without God. And much of our church, our church leaders, have adopted that religion, sadly, and compromised it with God’s word.

Swanson: Ken, as you write this book, ‘Already Compromised,’ do you get the sense that you are effectively very, very close to Omaha Beach in the war of the worldviews? I mean, you are right there, where the ideas are being formulated, where the minds and the lives of the next generation are being formed by the millions across this country, I mean this is an important battle.

Ham: It is, it’s an extremely important battle. Because, you know what, it only takes one generation to lose a culture. That’s all it takes. And if you can capture one generation, you’ll have the culture. And just as, you know, when the Israelites crossed the Jordan river and there were 12 stones to remind the next generation of what God did and what did we find? They weren’t reminded, the next generation, they lost it in one generation, we’re losing this culture before our very eyes today because the church opened the door to allow the philosophy of naturalism, and evolution, millions of years, to permeate into God’s word. We need to shut that door. If we don’t shut that door, that’s where the battle’s at right now, if we don’t shut that door, we’re going to lose this culture, America will be the England and Europe of tomorrow.

Liberty Counsel Appeals Ruling and Calls Limits on Ex-Gay Therapy for Minors 'Child Endangerment'

After a district court judge rejected their challenge of California’s law prohibits therapists from practicing dangerous sexual orientation conversion therapy on minors, Liberty Counsel has decided to appeal the ruling and has continued to portray the law as a boon to child predators. LC chairman Mat Staver said in a statement that the law promotes “child endangerment” and “will destroy many lives,” maintaining that “Jerry Sandusky would welcome a law like SB 1172” as “it is endangering generations of Americans.”

Late last night, Liberty Counsel filed a request for an emergency appeal and declarations in support of our appeal, asking the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to block California law SB 1172 which goes into effect on January 1, 2013. The law will ban any counsel that seeks to reduce or eliminate same-sex sexual attractions, behavior, or identity.

“If a young boy molested by the likes of a Jerry Sandusky develops severe emotional distress and unwanted same-sex sexual attractions, this law will force the counselor to tell the boy that his feelings are normal and good,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel. Staver continued, “If the counselor seeks to reduce or eliminate the stress caused by his client’s molestation, the counselor will commit an ethical violation. That is child endangerment!”

A 2001 study in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that 46% of homosexuals were molested in childhood. Without counseling, these victims often act out the very same sexual behavior used in their molestation. Staver said, “Jerry Sandusky would welcome a law like SB 1172. Minors who are sexually molested will face even more damage when they are told that their unwanted same-sex sexual attractions or behavior are natural and normal. This law is an outrage and it will destroy many lives and wreck the counseling profession,” said Staver.

“The minors we represent have not and do not want to act on their same-sex attractions. They are greatly benefiting from counseling,” Staver said. “If this law goes into effect and there is no emotional help available to these children, I fear they will suffer irreparable harm,” said Staver.

“Without this emergency injunction, the State of California will essentially barge into the private therapy rooms of victimized young people and tell them that their confusion caused by the likes of a Jerry Sandusky abuser is normal and they should pursue their unwanted same-sex sexual attractions and behavior. This is not only outrageous, it is endangering generations of Americans!” said Staver.

Joyner: 'I'm Not Convinced That the Election Was Not Stolen'

Yesterday, Rick Joyner dedicated his "Prophetic Perspective on Current Events" program to discussing the re-election of President Obama ... which he is pretty sure was stolen. 

Citing a 2006 paper from Princeton University revealing that electronic voting machines could be easily hacked, Joyner declared that he has heard lots of anecdotal evidence about voting machines changing votes cast for Mitt Romney and giving them to Barack Obama. On top of that, Joyner is sure that the implementation of Voter ID laws in Indiana and North Carolina was instrumental in swinging those states away from Obama, who won them in 2008, to Romney this year.  Add to that stories about buses full of non-English speaking voters being driving from precinct to precinct to cast votes for Obama coupled with stories of entire precincts not registering a single vote for Romney and it is pretty obvious that the election was fraudulent, which means that President Obama's second term is entirely illegitimate: 

Eliason: Affirming Gay People like Encouraging Pyromaniacs

Liberty Counsel chairman Mat Staver appeared on VCY America’s Crosstalk yesterday to discuss his so far unsuccessful legal challenge to California’s law banning ex-gay therapy practiced on minors, where host Vic Eliason commended his efforts and said that affirming a gay person’s sexual orientation is “like saying to the pyromaniac: go ahead and try it again.”

Staver: These clients who have a right to receive the kind of counseling that they want and is benefiting them, they will be told ‘no you can’t have that anymore.’ The only kind of counsel that you can get is that these confused feelings that you have and that you don’t want, don’t worry about them, just act on them, let’s change your religious and moral views instead.

Eliason: That’s like saying to the pyromaniac: go ahead and try it again. Inflaming emotions and passions….

Staver argued that the law will hurt survivors of child abuse because they will begin to “have feelings towards somebody of the same-sex because that’s how he was abused, that’s how he was dominated,” saying that gays are “abnormal” and have a “risky” lifestyle. He added that sometimes sexual orientation conversion therapy isn’t even needed because the orientation can “go away spontaneously” and “without any intervention at all.”

The likes of a Jerry Sandusky, the monster that he has been on the media and around the country, molest a young boy. That boy then begins to have anger and identity issues and it affects his relationship with his classmates and with his parents, then begins to act out or have feelings towards somebody of the same-sex because that’s how he was abused, that’s how he was dominated. That’s a normal response for someone going through something like this where they’ve been sexually dominated.



There are studies that show that some minors for example that might develop these same-sex sexual attractions, they go away spontaneously, they go away without any intervention at all, they just simply go away. Now, what happens if you have situations like that where someone just says, ‘hey it’s natural and normal, go ahead and act on it.’ Well no it’s not natural and normal, in fact it’s abnormal, it’s risky.

More Conservative Groups Repeat Blatantly False Planned Parenthood Attack

As Kyle reported yesterday, right-wing activists are jumping on what they claim is definitive proof that Planned Parenthood is teaching young women to conceal bruises that result from domestic violence.

Of course the charge is completely bogus. Planned Parenthood posted a video entitled “How to look your best the morning after” on one of its Facebook pages. The video, and title, were created by the British domestic abuse prevention group “Refuge” to draw attention to the issue and tell views to not “cover it up.”

However, an anti-choice website LifeNews reported it as if Planned Parenthood came up with the video’s title and is using it to assist women in covering up abuse. But conservatives who either never bothered to watch the video or know that the charge is ludicrous but don’t care ran with the story.

Fox Nation posted the LifeNews story verbatim and Concerned Women for America president Penny Nance even released a statement demanding Congress defund the women’s health organization over the matter:

Why are we giving $1 million dollars per day to an organization that thinks a practical way to end domestic violence is to coach victims on makeup tips to hide their abuse? Once again Planned Parenthood gets it so wrong. Between coaching pimps on how to obtain free abortions for sex trafficking victims, to support for sex selection abortions, to targeting minority babies, this organization is a toxic waste of taxpayer funds and is damaging to American culture. They deceitfully wrap their radical ideology in terms like 'women's health,' but all they really care about is perpetuating their insidious goals of coarsening our culture and undermining American families.

Since Planned Parenthood seems to be in cahoots with pimps and traffickers (see Live Action's expose), this makes perfect sense. After all, they want those pimps happy and able to keep making money so they can pay for 'their girls' to have abortions. Some johns won't pay for a prostitute with bruises, so learning how to cover them up means they can go back out on the street sooner. Planned Parenthood may be a non-profit, but they sure know how to make money. Congress needs to defund this parasite immediately.

Along with Nance’s shamelessly dishonest statement, CWA blogger Christian Shelby claimed that while the video is actually meant to fight abuse Planned Parenthood “has turned it on its head, posting the video with the simple headline: ‘How to look your best the morning after.’”

Actually the British organization gave the video that title, but right-wing groups like CWA have no use for basic facts when trying to smear Planned Parenthood.

Enter Planned Parenthood, who recently posted a video on their Facebook page that instructs teenage girls on how to hide the evidence of abuse with makeup. After all, why report the scumbag? You deserved it, didn’t you? It’s not your boyfriend’s fault that he’s a pathetic excuse for a man who can only win an argument with his fists. This isn’t a problem for police. No. This is a job for Covergirl.

Actually, the video is from a legitimate organization in the U.K. that’s fighting domestic violence. But Planned Parenthood — ever the friend of pimps, statutory rapists, and sex traffickers — has turned it on its head, posting the video with the simple headline: “How to look your best the morning after.”

At least one anti-choice blogger, Ben Johnson, apparently decided that watching the video and reading the headline might be important before writing about it and concluded that the video is clearly “opposed to covering up domestic abuse.”

But is it any wonder that the same activists who either never found the time to watch or are misrepresenting the anti-violence PSA in question are the very same ones who praised Live Action’s deceptively edited videos that targeted Planned Parenthood?

UPDATE: Family Research Council president Tony Perkins has also joined the smear campaign:

UPDATE II: LifeNews has updated their article to claim that “Planned Parenthood’s presentation of the video is problematic, not the video itself,” arguing that it is “problematic” because Refuge titled the video, “How To Look Your Best The Morning After.”

Maybe LifeNews, Concerned Women for America and Tony Perkins should take their grudge up with Refuge, as Planned Parenthood does not have control over the names of other organization’s videos.

Liberty Counsel: In an 'Irony of Unimaginable Proportions," the 'War on Christmas' is Now Forcing Christians Into the Closet

Today, Mat Staver and Matt Barber were back with another dispatch from the never-ending "war on Christmas," this time voicing their outrage about a decision by a Florida elementary school to remove a nativity scene its Christmas display.  According to reports, the nativity scene is now being stored in a closet ... which prompted Staver and Barber to comment on the "irony of unimaginable proportions" that now "Christians are being forced into the closet":

Bryan Fischer Defends Ban on Women in Combat by Lying about the Israeli Military

Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association today dedicated his radio show to railing against the American Civil Liberties Union for filing a lawsuit against the ban on women in combat. He got most heated in responding to the claims from ban opponents who point to Israel’s policy towards women, arguing that Israel actually excludes women from combat roles and anyone who tells you otherwise is lying.

Don’t let people lie to you that the Israelis use women in combat, they do not. They tried it for three weeks in 1948, they scrapped it, it doesn’t work and they’ve never done it again. Now women still serve in the Israeli military, they serve as secretaries, clerks, communications specialists, nurses, teachers and army social workers. They do not serve in combat. They don’t serve as pilots, they don’t serve on ships, they don’t pump gas, they don’t even drive trucks. Now they do receive a minimal amount of weapons training but they receive no training in how to use weapons in combat and they don’t even practice shooting at combats. In fact the only time, and this is what perpetuates the myth, the only time that Israeli female soldiers carry weapons is on parade.

However, this is simply not the case.

“Women have served in combat roles in the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) since the mid-1990s,” the BBC reports. “During the 2006 Lebanon conflict, women fired artillery, served on warships, and piloted aircraft.”

Apparently Fischer doesn’t believe the IDF’s own website which clearly states that women in “some of the most combative, extreme roles” in the military.

Everywhere in the IDF, women play a vital role in all positions, both combat and administrative. In the Air Force, Navy, and Ground Forces- these women man some of the most combative, extreme roles in the IDF.

Today, over 90% of all IDF jobs are available for female soldiers, including a variety of elite positions. Over the last decade, IDF women completed pilot’s course, became naval officers and took on a variety of infantry positions.

The following women fight alongside men, contributing to the security of the State of Israel and proving their immense toughness

The IDF says women serve as weapons instructors, pilots in the air force and soldiers in combat, K-9, field intelligence and engineering units.

 

There is even an entire page about combat options for Israeli female service members.

But Fischer doesn’t have any interest in doing even elementary research into this issue and is much more content with spewing baseless statements that fly in the face of reality.

The Smearing of Planned Parenthood Reaches a New Low

Earlier today, Erick Erickson of Red State retweeted a tweet from Kristina Ribali, the Director of New Media at FreedomWorks, linking to a "disgusting" LifeNews.com article accusing Planned Parenthood of promoting a video that shows young women "how to cover up those nasty cuts and bruises that result from a beating."

The video in question does, in fact, appear to be a demonstration from an obviously abused young woman attempting to conceal the bruises and lacerations on her face with make-up until she hears a noise off-screen and quickly turns off the camera ... at which point a message appears that reads:

65% of women who suffer domestic violence keep it hidden.

Don't cover it up.

Share this and help someone speak out.

A URL for the London-based domestic abuse helpline that produced the ad is then provided.  Obviously, the entire purpose of the ad is to juxtapose the scene presented against the real message of speaking out against domestic violence, and LifeNews even eventually admits this, yet still presents the video as if Planned Parenthood is encouraging young women to conceal abuse:

But the way Planned Parenthood headlines it—with “How to look your best the morning after,” teens are mislead by Planned Parenthood into the cover up mentality. On the anti-domestic violence site, the video is introduced with the headline: “Don’t cover it up.” That headline makes a world of difference to young teens who run across the video.

Presumably, the reason Planned Parenthood headlined the video "How To Look Your Best The Morning After" is because the video is titled "How To Look Your Best The Morning After."  The title is intentionally misleading in order to drive home to real message. 

And, of course, LifeNews was not alone as the geniuses over at Twitchy are likewise outraged about the video because they are apparently equally clueless: 

The video, which is from a legitimate organization fighting against domestic violence, does end with “don’t cover it up.”

But the way Planned Parenthood framed it, the message is just the opposite: “You probably had it coming, girls. May as well try to doll yourselves up afterward.” Appalling.

But, what else can one expect from an organization that routinely aids and abets the purposeful selective aborting of female babies, and covers up statutory rape?

...

Heartbreaking and beyond repugnant ... Where is the feminist outrage at teaching young women to “look their best” after being violently beaten? So far, crickets. Abortion trumps all, you see.

Planned Parenthood had nothing to do with this video, other than posting it on one of its Facebook pages ... but the hatred of the organization has become so pathological that even simply linking to a video urging women not to cover up domestic abuse is portrayed as an effort to encourage women to cover up domestic abuse! 

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious