Fighting the Right

Boykin: US Must 'Identify the Enemy as the Theology of Islam' or 'We Cannot be Victorious'

Family Research Council Vice President Jerry Boykin appeared on Janet Parshall’s radio show In the Market yesterday to do—what else?—whip up anti-Muslim animosity and spew bizarre conspiracy theories. He told Parshall that “Islam is not a religion” but a “totalitarian way of life” since, apparently, only “16 percent of Islam is a religion.” Boykin said that people need to act just like the Founding Fathers did in speaking up against the Muslim faith, citing Parshall, End Times fanatic Joel Rosenberg and others as courageous people who are channeling the Founders by attacking Islam and standing up to the “politically correct” elites!

Boykin: Islam is not a religion, now it has a religious component, 16 percent of Islam is religion, but the rest of it is a legal system, a geopolitical system, a military system, a financial system, it’s a totalitarian way of life and they say that. But our media and our leadership reject what they say about Islam so it’s incredible that we are just so politically correct and so afraid of these people. Where are the men of courage like the Founding Fathers that knew if they didn’t succeed they were going to be executed as being traitors, where are those kind of people today? Well you know where they are? They’re the Janet Parshall’s, they’re the Joel Rosenberg’s, they’re the people that are willing to stand up and speak openly about this stuff and take the ire of the media and critics.

Boykin also expressed his frustration that the Department of Defense will not “identify the enemy as the theology of Islam,” which Parshall said is just like trying to be “engaged in World War II without identifying the Nazis as the Nazis.”

Later, the former general later discussed the firestorm he caused in 2003 when he delivered speeches in uniform arguing that the US was at war against Islam and that Muslims worship an “idol.” He was reprimanded the following year by President Bush and found to have breached military regulations.

Always one to play the martyr-card, Boykin said he was simply attacked by the media for “my Christian faith” and “for boldly proclaiming that our real battle was not against the Taliban or the Al Qaeda but was a spiritual battle.” “When you expose Satan you must expect a reaction,” Boykin said, even alleging that his First Amendment rights were undermined. But while he told Parshall that he didn’t care what his critics said, Boykin actually apologized for his comments at the time.

Parshall: I shake my head, if you’re going to be even a passive student of history, how would we have ever engaged in World War II without identifying the Nazis as the Nazis? You’re military, teach us, how would you be able to defeat an enemy without rightfully identifying the enemy and it seems in this country we’re loath to identify the enemy.

Boykin: Sun Tzu, the great Chinese warrior and philosopher, said know your enemy and know yourself and you need not fear a thousand battles. I was so frustrated while I was in the Department of Defense because I kept trying to impress upon them that we have to identify the enemy as the theology of Islam and those people that are rabid adherents to the theology are the enemy. But no one would accept that and I was told to go sit in a corner and nobody wanted to hear it. Obviously now some are starting to get it; we cannot be victorious if we can’t identify the enemy.



Boykin: The worst period was 2003 when I was the front story on every news program and every newspaper for my Christian faith and for boldly proclaiming that our real battle was not against the Taliban or the Al Qaeda but was a spiritual battle and that certainly did not sit well. I also said that our real enemy in what we’re dealing with is Satan, you know when you expose Satan you must expect a reaction. So I took quite a beating for quite a while and I was devastated by it, I must tell you, the First Amendment that I protected for over three decades at that time, only to have the media turn on me, but you know what I’m a lot tougher now as a result of it and I don’t really care what they think because ultimately I answer to God and not to man.

Joyner: Gay Activists are the Most Intolerant Group in the World

On yesterday's episode of "Prophetic Perspective on Current Events," Rick Joyner was discussing the recent remarks made by Chick-Fil-A president Dan Cathy and the controversy they created when he declared that "most Christians [and] most conservatives are not anti-gay" but are simply following Scripture.  In fact, Joyner said, what has happened is that "the gay agenda has gone to such an extreme" that gay activists have become one of the "most intolerant groups not only in America, but in the world."  And now Americans have become fed up with "the imposition of their immorality on us" and Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day is a sign of "a major pushback" against that agenda:

Focus on the Family Lists Homosexuality alongside Rape and Adultery as Signs of 'Brokenness'

Ex-gay activist and Focus on the Family analyst Jeff Johnston is launching a new group, with Focus’s blessing, focused on sexual orientation conversion therapy in the wake of criticisms of the tactic by Exodus International’s Alan Chambers. Johnston says that Satan is responsible for the “sexual brokenness” found in gays and lesbians and that their sexual orientation is a result of poor parenting and molestation. Today, Johnston posted on an article on Focus’s political arm CitizenLink where he mocked homophobia and heteronormativity as rare, ridiculous and unfounded, comparing the LGBT rights movement to a campaign of people with deteriorating eyesight who stop wearing their eyeglasses, even if that means causing accidents while driving, in protest of “binocular-normativity.” He lambasted LGBT rights advocates for having people be “defined” by “their brokenness,” saying that homosexual and transgender people are just more signs of the world’s “brokenness,” just like rape, adultery and STIs.

Aside from my own near-sightedness, astigmatisms and presbyopia, three family members have lost an eye – for a variety of unrelated reasons. Two of them wear prosthetic eyes. Yet everywhere I look, it is a two-eyed world. When was the last time you saw someone on television take out his prosthetic eye? My family started a campaign; you may have seen some of our bumper stickers: “Monoculars Unite!” “Blind is Good!” “End Binocular-Normativity!”

Textbooks should show more people with no eyes or one eye – why do they all assume people have two eyes? Kids with glasses get teased and called “four eyes.” Our national anthem is an insult – no, I can’t “see by the dawn’s early light” – until I fumble around and find my glasses. I spent a month protesting 20/20-vision-normativity by not wearing my glasses. After a couple car accidents, my wife made me put them on again. People with good vision don’t have to spend thousands of dollars over their lifetime for glasses, contacts, prosthetic eyes, LASIK, cataract surgery, seeing-eye dogs or learning braille. It’s just not fair.



Aside from nature and culture, God has also revealed his truth for our sexuality in the Bible. We go back to the words of Genesis – affirmed by Jesus in the Gospels – and read that God created us male and female in his image. Things are defined by their perfection, by what they are supposed to be, not by their brokenness. So we don’t redefine God’s creation or gauge how we should live by the broken sexuality we see around us: adultery, pornography, sexually-transmitted infections, HIV/AIDS, abortion, infertility, transgenderism, homosexuality, misogyny, lust, divorce, rape.

Same-sex lusts, fantasies and sexual activity violate God’s male-female design in a unique way. Instead of normalizing brokenness, calling homosexuality “good,” and identifying people by their sexual attractions, those who follow Jesus are called to bring redemption, grace and transformation.

Similarly, our sexuality and relationships have been dreadfully impacted by sin. Many of us under-estimate the power and effects of sin; we don’t understand how what Dallas Willard calls “radical evil in the ruined soul” has affected our sexuality and relationships. Sin devastates lives. And sexual sin, because sexuality is so good, so powerful, and such a deep part of our being, is especially destructive.

Even in our sexual brokenness, we see glimmers of God’s design. One of those glimmers is that though humans have the capacity for all kinds of sexual behaviors, and despite sin, the world is largely heteronormative – and not arbitrarily so. Most cultures recognize the truth displayed in our bodies, that humanity is divided into two sexes, male and female. And almost all have some form of marriage – mainly to keep children with the husband and wife who procreated them.

David Barton's New Axiom: 'Liberalism Kills'

On "WallBuilders Live" today, Richard Land was discussing the dangers of liberal Christianity when he made the declared that "liberalism kills," meaning that churches or denominations that embrace more liberal theologies will inevitably lose members and collapse.

David Barton was particularly enamored with Land's axiom and declared that they "ought to emblazon [it] on everything we have": 

I tell you what, Richard gave a two word axiom that we ought to emblazon on everything we have: liberalism kills.

Liberalism kills, whether it's in the family; whether it's in a university; whether it's in education; whether it's in business; whether it's in government, and especially in denominations, liberalism kills.

That's a great axiom to remember is liberalism kills.

Harry Jackson Cites Dubious Studies to Claim Gay Parents Harm Children

Trying to boost his campaign to generate a voter rebellion against Democrats over the issue of marriage equality, Harry Jackson wrote in his column today that legalizing same-sex marriage would harm children. He asserts that gay couples who seek to become parents “put their own fleeting desires ahead of the God-given rights of their children,” whose children he says are more likely to be gay, depressed, unemployed or drug users. Jackson cited the work of Walter Schumm of Kansas State University to back up his claims, but Schumm’s work has been roundly criticized and he is closely tied to anti-gay crackpot Paul Cameron of the Family Research Institute. Later, Jackson mentioned the notorious Mark Regnerus study as part of his warning against gay parenting. What Jackson fails to mention, however, is that even the journal that published his report recently admitted that it was severely flawed, noting that just two of the respondents actually “lived with a lesbian couple for their entire childhoods, and most did not live with lesbian or gay parents for long periods, if at all.”

The reason that legally defined marriage is important is because of children. It takes a mother and a father to conceive a child, and children have a God-given right to have a relationship with both their biological mother and their biological father. Children also have a God-given right to have both a male role model and a female role model in their homes. There are certainly times when tragedy takes a parent from a child, but what about the much more frequent times when adults put their own fleeting desires ahead of the God-given rights of their children? Desires change, as the breakups of both heterosexual and homosexual relationships testify.

As our nation continues to wrestle with the meaning and precise definition of marriage Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered activists consistently dismiss the issue of children. Same-sex marriage advocates insist that children of homosexual couples have the same or better outcomes than children of heterosexual couples. Unfortunately for them these assertions are based more on philosophy than hard science. For example, a 2010 study by Dr. Walter Schumm of Kansas State University confirmed that adult children raised by homosexual couples are (unsurprisingly) two to five times as likely to identify themselves as homosexual as children of heterosexuals. But the nation is divided as to whether that is an important outcome or not.

More specifically, whenever the topic of children reared by gay parents is raised: the assertion is made that there are no special problems or disadvantages because of their parents’ choices of “partners.” But this image (if remotely true) represents a tiny, disproportionately wealthy fraction of the gay population. Most of the scientists who have researched the children of such families admit as much.

Common sense would remind us that the results of any particular study depends both on how one defines a household headed by an LGBT couple, and what factors one evaluates when looking at “outcomes.” Dr. Mark Regnerus of the University of Texas, Austin, recently set out to hear the stories of the adults living in America today who were raised by parents in homosexual relationships. LGBT activists have fought vigorously to malign and suppress his findings. In short, he learned that, on 25 of 40 different outcomes evaluated, the children of women who’ve had same-sex relationships fare quite differently than those in stable, biologically-intact mom-and-pop families, displaying numbers more comparable to those from heterosexual stepfamilies and single parents.

This study included controls for age, race, gender, and the impact of being bullied as a youth, or the gay-friendliness of the state in which they live. Yet the respondents of same-sex parents were more apt to become unemployed, be less healthy and more depressed. They also were more likely to have cheated on a spouse or partner, have more male and female sex partners, experience more sexual victimization, and were more likely to reflect negatively on their childhood family life. Those raised by same-sex couples also were more likely to smoke marijuana and have trouble with the law.

At this point in our nation, no one is debating the right of consenting adults to do what they wish with each other in private. But redefining the ancient institution of marriage is an entirely different matter. This will set the stage for more and more children to grow up without a mother or a father, simply to placate the desire of adults. We must fight to preserve the traditional definition of marriage for the sake of these children.

Robison: Staying Quiet on Gay Marriage is Like Staying Quiet on Allowing 'Pedophiles to Play in the Public Parks'

Today a video appeared on Bishop Harry Jackson's "Grow With Hope" YouTube page featuring a message recorded by James Robison, presumably for this upcoming Defense of Marriage Summit. In it, Robison makes the case for keeping the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman by saying that remaining silent on this issue "would be like stepping back when suddenly the public has decided to allow pedophiles to play in the public parks and there was nothing we could do about it because we refused to take a stand": 

Bryan Fischer, Romney's Most Vocal Critic, Tells Everyone to Stop Criticizing Romney

Bryan Fischer and Mitt Romney have had a rather contentious relationship going back all the way to last year's Values Voter Summit, when Romney called out Fischer from the stage for his relentless bigotry.  Ever since, Fischer has been a vocal critic of Romney personally and a thorn in the side of his campaign, complicated efforts to unify the Religious Right behind Romney heading into the election.

In fact, just last month Fischer dedicated a segment on his radio program to asking listeners to call in and share their opinions about whether he was being too hard on Romney and asking if they thought that his constant criticism of Romney and his campaign was, in the end, helping President Obama.

It was, Fischer said, a relatively simple question:

"Do you want me to keep telling you the sort of honest and sometimes ugly truth about Romney or do you, I don't know how else to put this, do you want me to kind of shade the truth because if I tell the truth about Mitt Romney, it may discourage voters in the pro-family movement?"

Most of the callers told Fischer to keep after Romney and do whatever he could to hold his feet to the fire on the issues that they care about, which is exactly what Fischer argued was necessary in a column he wrote just two weeks ago:

Some conservatives complain when conservative voices such as mine register complaints about Gov. Romney’s agenda. They don’t want his feet held to the fire until after he defeats President Obama. That will be the time, they say, after he’s been elected, to put the pressure on.

But surely this is misguided. If we don’t hold his feet to the fire now, how will it be possible to do it then? If he gets elected while ignoring legitimate conservative concerns, because conservatives haven’t even voiced them, what possible reason do conservatives have to think he’ll pay attention to conservative concerns while in office?

The truth is that conservatives who complain loudly and longly now, in the hopes that the governor can be persuaded to at least sound like a conservative, are doing him the biggest favor of all.

...

Bottom line: the conservatives who complain vocally about his lurch to the center-left are the best friends he has in the world, and represent his last, best hope of sitting one day in Barack Obama’s empty chair.

But in the last two weeks, Romney has struggled trough serious missteps and revelations that have left his campaign reeling ... and now Fischer has suddenly changed his tune and declared that the time for criticizing Romney has passed and so conservatives need to simply fall into line and hope for the best: 

This approach of constructive criticism was appropriate through the primary season, through the conventions, and through the Values Voter Summit two weekends ago. However, with the election less than 50 days away, the time to nudge the governor further to the right is probably past. He has likely been nudged as far as he can be nudged. He is what he is, and with the heat and intensity of a campaign in the stretch run, there simply is not enough time for him to do any further retooling. There isn’t time for a “turnaround” even if it would be a good idea.

The constructive criticism served a good purpose. In response, the governor seems to have embraced the need to deliver a more well-rounded conservative message, offer more in the way of specifics, talk more openly about values issues, and unleash Paul Ryan. Those adjustments, if he will follow through on them, are about all conservatives can expect at this stage of the game.

At some point, the criticism, as well-intended as it might be, becomes counter-productive. From my perspective, we have now reached that point. Ann Romney is probably right to call for a cease-fire from the friendlies.

It’s now time for the conservative community to accept Gov. Romney as he is, realize he is as conservative as he is likely to get, and focus our energies on drawing the significant contrasts between the president and the governor on critical issues such as abortion, marriage, Israel and the economy.

In competitive golf, we have an expression: play it as it lies. If your ball lands in a divot, you play it from the divot. If it lands at the base of a tree, you play it from the base of the tree. You don’t get to kick the ball out in the fairway to get the lie you want.

We’re now at that place with Gov. Romney. Conservatives are clearly playing from an awkward lie with the governor. But winning shots have been hit from bad lies in the past, and they can be hit from bad lies again. It’s time now for conservatives to get the ball as close to the pin as possible on November 6. 

As we have said before, for all of the Religious Right's talk of putting principles over politics, when push comes to shove, they always fall in line.

Janet Porter Pushes Ohio State Senate to Vote on 'Heartbeat Bill' before Election

Faith2Action’s Janet Porter believes that her prized Heartbeat Bill, which would criminalize nearly all abortions, may soon receive a vote in the GOP-controlled Ohio State Senate. The bill already passed the House but has been held up in the State Senate, leading Porter to embark on a campaign to drive out Republicans who didn’t want to put the bill up for a vote and bring together Religious Right activists to pray for the bill’s passage.

According to a letter sent to supporters earlier this month [PDF], Porter said that her bill may receive a vote in the Senate before the general election in November. Of course, Porter has predicted the passage of her bill in Ohio and other states many times before, and she is organizing another prayer rally in the Statehouse Atrium on October, 28.

Dear Friend of Faith2Action,

Since you last heard from me, we've entered a critical new phase in the Heartbeat Bill – one that has involved intense behind-the-scenes negotiations with former opponents of the bill and much prayer and fasting! I am absolutely amazed: it appears that God is doing the miraculous again by turning former Heartbeat Bill opponents into allies! I believe we are finally reaching the point of breakthrough.

As I write this, the final changes to an agreed-upon "compromise bill" are being drafted—without losing the vital legal protection for babies. In some ways, this new version is even stronger than the original thanks to countless hours of painstaking work by some of the nation's leading pro-life attorneys.

This revised, mutually acceptable bill will be presented to leaders in the Senate this week and we are asking for a vote on the Heartbeat Bill on the floor of the Ohio State Senate, before the election!

The good news: This agreed-upon bill is a huge step toward a floor vote and the most important breakthrough since it passed the House more than a year ago. We are now just inches away from effectively ending abortion in Ohio!

The bad news: We've gone to the mat many times in the past for causes we believed in, but never before in our decade-long history have our resources been this depleted. Getting the Heartbeat Bill to this point has literally taken everything we have personally and as a ministry. We've spent our personal savings, gone without salaries and poured everything we had into getting our message out to the pro-life voters, prayer warriors and senators of Ohio.

Our campaign to publicly hold our senators accountable for their inaction included tens of thousands of postcards, weekly press releases, robo-calls, newspaper ads, rallies, emails, and flyers. And it worked! We give God all the glory for this. And I personally want to thank our loyal supporters like you who make our work possible.

William Murray: Obama is Waging a 'Jihad against Non-Islamic Religious Groups – Both Jews and Christians'

Religious Right activist William Murray, who leads both the Religious Freedom Coalition and the Government Is Not God Political Action Committee (GING-PAC), is using GING-PAC to post advertisements in newspapers across swing states. According to Murray, “Barack Hussein Obama and Hillary Clinton love the Muslim Brotherhood” and “Obama is carrying on what amounts to a Jihad against non-Islamic religious groups – both Jews and Christians.” “Obama is waging a war on religious liberty,” Murray writes, “but he’s stopped waging a war on Islamic terrorism here and around the globe.”

In a fundraising solicitation for the newspaper advertisements [PDF], which warn that Obama will force chaplains to perform same-sex marriages and bring Sharia law and the Muslim Brotherhood into government, Murray claims that Obama will use “voter fraud so they can stay in power” and pursue “his unrestrained support for radical Islam.” Murray calls Obama a “dangerous racist” and the “most racially divisive” president in American history who is out to destroy the country.

GING-PAC needs your help to stop him from winning another four years in the White House – where he will continue his aggressive assault on religious liberty – and his unrestrained support for radical Islam – both here in the U.S. and around the globe.

You can help us run newspaper advertisements in key states to defeat Barack Obama’s anti-religious, pro-Islamist agenda in November!

We are less than 90 days before the most important election in the history of our nation since 1865! A lot is at stake! And I’m sure you understand the severity of what we are facing!

Clearly, Obama is the most dangerous racist, pro-abortion, pro-gay, pro-Islam and anti-capitalist president who has ever occupied the White House – and he’ll try any dirty trick in the book to win this November’s election. That’s why he’s got Attorney General Eric Holder suing states that are trying to implement voter ID laws. Obama and Holder want voter fraud so they can stay in power.

Holder is suing states trying to have honest elections – but he dropped the serious case of voter intimidation against members of the New Black Panther party who were intimidating white voters in Philadelphia during the 2008 election!

Obama is not only the most viciously anti-religious president in history, but he’s turning out to be the most racially divisive one as well. In fact, he seems to deliberately try to provoke racial animosity. When he was running for office in 2008, he claimed to be a post-racial candidate. He lied.

Once he’s back in office, he’ll be totally unrestrained in his plans to bring our nation to moral and economic ruin. He’s already done a pretty good job. Imagine what he’ll do in four more years.

Boykin Issues Warning About Muslim Brotherhood Infiltration and the Repeal of DADT

On Friday, Jerry Boykin appeared on WND Radio America where he warned host Greg Corombos that the Muslim Brotherhood's infiltration of our government is far beyond what anyone could ever imagine and that the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell will make it difficult for soldiers to bond and therefore unwilling to lay down their lives for one another.

Boykin warned that the Muslim Brotherhood had managed to infiltrate all levels of government, as well as the two main political parties and even the media, citing the criticism that Michele Bachmann received over her anti-Muslim witch hunt as evidence that things are really, really bad:

Our government is so infiltrated and the Muslim Brotherhood has so much influence in this country, it is incredible. If Americans only took the time to do the proper research and to find out just how deep this infiltration into our government is, it would just frighten them. I just gave a talk on this last weekend to some folks here in Washington and they walked away saying "why don't we know this?" And my answer is because it is not in the interest of the mainstream media's agenda to tell you.

We have within, let's just say the Department of Homeland Security, two of the top people there with very high level security clearance are known to be associated with the Muslim Brotherhood. The Republican and Democratic parties are both infiltrated. Every government entity, to include the Department of Defense have people that are know to have had associations with the Muslim Brotherhood. And you know Michele Bachmann recently raised the issue of Huma Abedin, which is Hillary Clinton's closest aide and her parents' association with the Muslim Brotherhood and of course she just got blistered by her own party as well as the mainstream media, so it's bad.

Boykin also addressed the anniversary of the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell to warn that it would take a decade for the true impact of the decision to be felt because it will undermine military readiness by disrupting the bonding between soldiers and make them unwilling to risk their lives for their colleagues:

I think it's reducing the morale of the military.  I also think it's impacting on the readiness, and that readiness is something that unless you've been in the military - particularly in a combat organization - you don't understand it. The full effects of this will not be realized for a decade. But it is a camaraderie and a brotherhood is such that I am willing to risk my life for the guy next to me and that come with an absolute trust and a bonding that I am very concerned that the Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal will disrupt that bonding, that brotherhood.

Mitt Romney's Supreme Court Time Machine

PFAW video shows Romney's agenda for the Supreme Court is too extreme for America. Under his presidency, the future of the Court is looking pretty backwards.
PFAW

Joel Gilbert: ‘”Change” is a Code Word for a Revolution to End Capitalism’

Joel Gilbert, the filmmaker behind the theory that President Obama inherited a Marxist worldview from his “real father” Frank Marshall Davis – a theory adopted this week by the chairman of the Alabama Republican Party -- spoke last month with right-wing radio host Michael Savage.

Gilbert told Savage that Obama’s 2008 “Change” slogan was actually “a code word for a revolution to end capitalism” and assured listeners that by the end of his second term, the president will “achieve what he wants, which is to make America irreversibly socialist.” Part of this transformation, Gilbert said, is that “the middle class’ health care is going to be given away to poor and illegals.”

Savage: How is Obama’s campaign different this time around?

Gilbert: Well, what’s different is he was being very general and vague about ‘hope and change’ and everybody just read into it what they wanted, nobody really knew what ‘change’ meant from the socialist point of view. ‘Change’ is a code word for a revolution to end capitalism. Now his Marxist ideology is just coming through loud and clear. His entire campaign is based on the top one percent, of the breathtaking greed of a few. He talks about how the rich don’t pay their fair share. Well, anybody can just Google it and see that the top income brackets do pay up to 40 percent of income and it kind of goes down from there. So his entire campaign is based on this lie, this absurd notion that we don’t have a fair tax system. But this is the classic Marxist rhetoric that Obama would have gotten during this indoctrination from his real father, Frank Marshall Davis.

Gilbert: National healthcare is simply a socialist tool to eliminate the middle and upper classes. So for Obama, poor quality, long waits and high taxes in this national health care doesn’t matter. It’s just a socialist tool. For Obama in the next term, the middle class’ health care is going to be given away to poor and illegals. Middle class’ employers are going to be taxed and regulated out of business. And the middle class’ retirement will evaporate into a bankrupt, socialist state, and Obama will achieve what he wants, which is to make America irreversibly socialist without anyone ever realizing how it happened.

Gohmert: Obama 'Helped Jump-Start a New Ottoman Empire'

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) took to the House Floor today to declare that President Obama is helping to start a “new Ottoman Empire,” as seen in his decisions to end the war in Iraq, which Gohmert said means losing the war, and to topple Muammar Gaddafi’s dictatorship in Libya. Gohmert warned that we are witnessing the “massive beginning of a new Ottoman Empire that President Obama can take great credit for.” “Wow look what he has helped do in the Middle East, a new Ottoman Empire,” Gohmert said, “thank you President Barack Hussein Obama.” Gohmert added that he didn’t know if Obama is or is not a Christian, adding, “what I do know is that he has helped jump-start a new Ottoman Empire.”

Watch:

Phyllis Schlafly Claims Title IX Damaged US Performance at the Olympics

One of the main stories to come out of the 2012 London Olympics was the outright dominance of American female athletes, another sign of the success of the Title IX, which barred discrimination between men’s and women’s educational programs and is celebrating its 40th anniversary this year. But Title IX has always provoked the ire of Phyllis Schlafly and the Eagle Forum. In a radio alert today, Schlafly claims Title IX in fact “weakened our competitiveness” at the Olympics.

The US won 104 medals in London (58 for women and 45 for men), which Schlafly believes shows that male athletes suffered a severe injustice. “Feminist-imposed gender quotas hurt us at the Olympics in events which our Nation once dominated,” Schlafly claims, “While our Nation won the most medals for the fifth consecutive Summer Olympics, many of our medals were in contests of dubious value like beach volleyball. Title IX quotas have hurt our competitiveness in sports that are most helpful to the development of our young men.” Schlafly points to the US failure to win medals in wrestling as a sign of Title IX’s allegedly disastrous impact; however, throughout Olympic history the US has never dominated wrestling in the Olympics” And while Schlafly believes that the policy wreaked havoc on male collegiate sports, female athletes and women’s teams still receive significantly less financial support compared to their male peers.

Feminist-imposed gender quotas hurt us at the Olympics in events which our Nation once dominated. The systematic elimination of certain men’s sports from colleges has weakened our competitiveness. We won only four medals in all of men’s wrestling, less than half the total won by Iran, and only a fraction of the medals won by Russia in this masculine sport. Wrestling is an immensely popular and valuable sport; it’s inexpensive and safer than other sports. Wrestling develops discipline in boys. Many high-achievers, such as Donald Rumsfeld and pro-life attorney Phill Kline, developed their toughness as wrestlers.

But although tens of thousands of high schools have thriving wrestling programs for boys, at the college level Title IX gender quotas have cancelled wrestling at all but a fraction of colleges. Many hundreds of successful college men’s wrestling programs have been eliminated, not for financial reasons, but due to Title IX gender quotas. These quotas typically require that the percentage of men and women in intercollegiate sports at a college equal the percentage of men and women enrolled as students, even though many colleges have become 60% women and only 40% men.

Other men’s sports have also been hurt by this feminist quota, such as swimming and track. Private swimming clubs and a few aging stars like Michael Phelps filled that gap this time, but we nearly struck out in men’s track in the marquee events of 100, 200, 400 and 800 meters, events the Americans historically dominated. While our Nation won the most medals for the fifth consecutive Summer Olympics, many of our medals were in contests of dubious value like beach volleyball. Title IX quotas have hurt our competitiveness in sports that are most helpful to the development of our young men.

Once Again, David Barton Puts His Ignorance on Display

Mat Staver was the guest on "WallBuilders Live" today as he, Rick Green, and David Barton discussed the importance of the issue of judges in this upcoming election by highlighting various recent Supreme Court decisions that had been decided by 5-4 margins.

After Staver rattled off several cases that were decided by close votes, Barton piped up to declare that the Lawrence v. Texas case was also a 5-4 decision.  Barton was wrong, as usual; it was a 6-3 decision

But then again what do you expect from someone who absurdly claims that in this case the Supreme Court ruled that everything that is consensual is constitutional ... even eleven year old girls having sex with ninety-five year old men: 

Lawrence v. Texas was a 5-4 decision and that's the one that gave the whole foundation for gay marriage because the court there said "look, here's the new deal: if it's consensual, it's constitutional."

Really?

So if an eleven year-old girl says she wants to have sex with a ninety-five year-old guy and they both consent, that's constitutional?

Now wait a minute; if five guys want to marry one girl and they consent, that's constitutional?

So what happened is that decision was a 5-4 decision that has opened the door to what we're seeing now not only with gay marriage but with what they're calling polyamorous marriages and open marriages and so many other things because the premise is that if everybody agrees, it's fine. And that's a wild decision.

Jacobs Warns Obama's 'Anti-Biblical' Policies have led to 'Floods and Fires and More'

Self-proclaimed prophet Cindy Jacobs, who blamed freak bird deaths on the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and predicted that the Obama administration’s support for LGBT rights will lead to a blizzard and the exposure of a major government scandal, warned Jim Bakker last week that more disasters are coming to America thanks to President Obama’s leadership. Jacobs told Bakker that she prophesied “that God had seen decisions made from our White House that were anti-biblical and that we were going to come into the season of the greatest weather patterns and disasters that we had seen, there were going to be floods and fires and more, and it all happened.”

She claimed that 2011 “historically was the worst year for weather-related disasters in our history, and I was mocked everywhere for that because they don’t understand spiritual things.” “We are going to have more weather disasters, it’s going to come up worse and worse, it’s not going to stop,” Jacobs contended.

Watch:

Jackson: Gay Marriage Will Open the Door to 'All Kinds of Crazy Stuff'

Harry Jackson appeared on CBN this morning to tell African Americans who might be torn between voting for Mormon like Mitt Romney and President Obama, who supports an "anti-God, anti-church agenda," that they cannot simply stay home and not vote. Instead, Jackson declared, they must support the candidate "whose values line up with clear Biblical mandates," saying sarcastically that "if you can vote for abortion and you can vote for the redefinition of marriage; you want to vote for two men marrying, or open the door for two women and three men and all kinds of crazy stuff - if you can do that and the Holy Spirit can be with out in the ballot box, more power to you":  

;

American Decency Association takes on Ryan Murphy's 'Glee' and 'New Normal'

The American Decency Association is going after Ryan Murphy and his two shows, Glee and The New Normal, for its stances on gay rights and supposed anti-Christian themes. The anti-gay ADA slammed Glee over its “sexualized themes and secular humanist propaganda indoctrinating viewers” and inclusion of “two openly homosexual teen boys whose lifestyle has been positively featured over the years.” The group warned that watching Glee is a violation of the Bible since the show “legitimize[s] perversity” and is “plied with such indoctrination leading young people to accept and approve of immoral lifestyles.”

The cultural waters our youth are swimming in are more than murky - a more apt description would be raw sewage. It’s hard to think of even one network television show that offers positive examples to viewers.

There is one wildly popular show watched by millions of teens, preteens, and adults which, on the surface, would seem fairly innocuous. The program is “Glee” on the Fox Network. Glee garners millions of viewers each week who tune in to watch this show about a mixed group of high-schoolers who are part of a modern-day glee club. Included with typical high school drama are entertaining song-and-dance numbers.

It sounds rather harmless, right? Think again. Glee is about as far from a “Sound of Music” production as you can get. Glee is often edgy, erotic, and extremely popular with youth – both teens and preteens. And that is why the show is especially concerning. For mixed with the catchy vocal production numbers are sexualized themes and secular humanist propaganda indoctrinating viewers.

The fourth season of Glee premiered this past Thursday evening, introducing a new male student to the cast of characters which includes two openly homosexual teen boys whose lifestyle has been positively featured over the years. This new student just happens to be a cross-dressing, makeup-wearing transsexual. But of course that barely raised an eyebrow among the show’s characters because, as one student stated, they’re “all about diversity and acceptance.”

Each week millions of teens and preteens tune in for Glee and are subtly plied with such indoctrination leading young people to accept and approve of immoral lifestyles all in the name of “diversity and tolerance.” How many Christian young people – and adults – are entertained by a show that gives approval of what God calls “debased” in Romans 1?

Romans 1:32 states: “Though they know God's righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.” This verse seems to speak not only to those who “practice” such immorality (such as the openly gay Ryan Murphy), but also to those who “approve” of it. Doesn’t it seem that being entertained by shows that legitimize perversity falls into the category of “giving approval” of it?

The ADA also criticized Murphy’s new comedy, The New Normal, and asked members to contact advertisers to withdraw from the show since it “pushes the gay agenda” and “offensively labels those who hold traditional values as bigoted homophobes.”

As a corporation that has chosen to sponsor the NBC television show “The New Normal,” I’m outraged by your support of a show that not only crosses the line with offensive, lewd verbiage and sexual imagery, but also pushes the gay agenda, while it offensively labels those who hold traditional values as bigoted homophobes.

Millions of Americans hold views regarding the gay agenda and same sex marriage that differ from the opinions pushed by Hollywood elites. This is made clearly obvious by the voters in dozens of states from the east coast to the west who have overwhelmingly upheld traditional marriage.

“The New Normal” blatantly mocks me and those millions of Americans by labeling us as “intolerant haters” when in fact the message you sponsor through this show is one of hate and intolerance toward those of us who hold a different viewpoint regarding the gay agenda.

Do you really want your company name associated with a show that mocks and offends millions of potential customers? If you continue to sponsor “The New Normal” I will do my best to tell my family and friends to include you on their “no shop” list.

I look forward to your response.

E.W. Jackson: Blacks are Selling Themselves into Slavery By Supporting the Democratic Party

Last week we noted that E.W. Jackson has launched an effort to lead "a mass Exodus of Christians from the Democrat party" on the grounds that the party has turned its back on God.

Earlier this week, Jackson released a new video as part of this effort in which he blasted the Democratic Party for its ties to Planned Parenthood, which "has been far more lethal to Black lives than the KKK ever was," and for comparing the fight for marriage equality to the fight for civil rights, which Jackson called "an outrageous lie" and "an insult to human intelligence." 

Jackson went on to declare that "our ancestors were sold against their will centuries ago, but we're going to the slave market voluntarily today" by supporting the Democratic Party which has "become anti-Christian, anti-church, anti-Bible, anti-life, anti-family, and anti-God."  As such, "it is time to come out of the Democrat Party and to refuse to support its candidates in their rebellion against God": 

On Anniversary of the Repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell, Once-Hysterical Religious Right is Largely Silent

On this day last year, the military certified the repeal of the discriminatory Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy after Congress overturned the policy. Religious Right activists warned that the military will suffer as a result, however, their ominous predictions failed to materialize as studies show that the new policy is working and benefiting the military.

Consequently, it wasn’t a surprise that anti-gay groups were largely quiet today on the anniversary as their warnings about an exodus of soldiers, a drop in enlistments and a return of the draft were clearly wrong.

Ron Crews of the Chaplains Alliance for Religious Liberty released a statement that the “radical sexual agenda in our military” is leading to significant “negative consequences,” citing one example of possible sexual harassment, same-sex ceremonies on bases and the supposed “silencing” of chaplains and DADT supporters:

No Cause for Celebration: DADT Repeal Immediately Creates Major Problems for Service Members

Approaching the first anniversary of the repeal of the so-called DADT policy, mounting evidence demonstrates the negative consequences of implementing a radical sexual agenda in our military.

“The American armed forces exist to defend our nation, not as social experiment lab in which our troops serve as human subjects,” said Chaplain (Colonel Retired) Ron Crews, ED of CALL. ”While many will ignore the negative impacts, or pretend that they don’t exist, threats to our troops’ freedom are mounting.”



“This list of problems and incidents that have arisen mere months after this administration imposed its will on the armed forces is disturbing to say the least, and we know it is only the beginning,” said Crews. “Compounding the outrage, service members are not free to speak out about these matters. This ensures that distrust in the ranks will increase and morale will decrease as the number of silenced victims grows.”

Focus on the Family’s political arm CitizenLink also said in a post quoting Crews and calling for Congress to pass a GOP-backed bill banning same-sex ceremonies on military property, which they said would preserve religious freedom by barring all chaplains from performing such ceremonies:

Crew said that a military religious freedom act introduced in January, House Resolution 3828, would help military personnel greatly.

“It’s a right-of-conscience clause that would provide protection to military personnel, so they would not be affected by their opposition to the repeal,” he explained.

If passed, H.R. 3828 would protect members of the Armed Forces who hold religious or moral convictions concerning “the appropriate and inappropriate expression of human sexuality” from discrimination or punishment for their beliefs.

The bill seeks to protect chaplains from being ordered to perform any services or ceremonies contrary to their faith, while preventing any same-sex marriage ceremonies from being performed on military posts, in accordance with the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council, who predicted an increase in rape if the policy was repealed, pivoted away from his group’s hysterical claims to instead focus on possible same-sex marriages in the military, a result of the “radical sexual and social agenda” pushed by “homosexual activists.” Sprigg also cited a survey from the Military Times, but didn’t mention that the same poll found negative views of the repeal among service members are declining.

He also dismissed claims that the military would have “completely collapsed in the first year after repeal” since “our service members are too professional to allow that to happen,” but FRC president Tony Perkins did in fact predict the reinstitution of the draft and that congressmen who voted for the repeal will have “blood on their hands.”

Since eight servicemembers reported harm from both circumstances (a homosexual “coming out” and one joining their unit), a total of 36 separate individuals reported such harm. The Palm Center chose to emphasize that this was only 4.5% of all those surveyed—failing to mention that it represents twenty percent of those who had a homosexual “come out” or join their unit. Twenty percent represents a significant risk of harm for the units involved—merely to advance the goals of the sexual revolution. Damage to good order, discipline, morale, and unit cohesion need not be universal to be unacceptable.

In the same Military Times survey, 8.4% of respondents said that repeal made them less likely to remain in the military, while only 3.3% said it would make them more likely to remain.

The Palm Center report almost completely ignores the most significant harms that have become immediately apparent in the first year since repeal. Predictions that the use of the military to advance a radical social/sexual agenda would place us on a “slippery slope” have clearly come true. Furthermore, assurances given in the November 2010 report of the Pentagon’s Comprehensive Review Working Group (CRWG) regarding the limited impact of repeal have not been fulfilled. Since the CRWG report was to a large extent the basis for the Congressional vote for repeal in December of 2010, it can even be argued that repeal was adopted under false pretenses.



Has America’s military completely collapsed in the first year after repeal? Of course not—our servicemembers are too professional to allow that to happen. The military is clearly being used, however, to advance a radical sexual and social agenda. The Palm Center cited one individual who stated that repeal “will help facilitate the slow cultural change towards greater acceptance” of homosexuality.

The purpose of our armed forces, however, is not to “facilitate cultural change.” It is to fight and win wars. By demanding that it do more than that, homosexual activists have undermined the single-minded focus that is necessary for military effectiveness.

 

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious