Marriage Equality

Jeffress: Marriage Equality Decision, White House Rainbow Lights Signs Of End Times

This past Sunday, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins delivered the sermon at Robert Jeffress’ church in Dallas. Although Perkins’ visit had been planned more than a year in advance, Jeffress was delighted that it ended up falling just two days after the Supreme Court struck down gay marriage bans nationwide, which Jeffress called “the greatest, most historic, landmark blunder in the history of the United States Supreme Court.”

Jeffress had some good news, though: The Supreme Court’s decision and the ensuing rainbow-flag projection on the White House all just confirm the Bible’s reports of what will happen before the return of Christ.

“What happened Friday was nothing short of an affront in the face of Almighty God,” Jeffres said in his introduction of Perkins. “And how did our president respond? President Obama responded Friday night by bathing the White House, the people’s house, in colors that represent what the Bible calls degredation, depravity and sexual perversion.”

Jeffress and his church, he said, are “not going to be silenced by the liberal left, Barack Obama or the United States Supreme Court.”

“We’re not despondent, we’re not discouraged in the least,” he added, “because everything that happened Friday is simply confirmation of what the Bible says is going to happen before the return of Jesus Christ.”

Jeffress has previously called the gay rights movement and the book “Fifty Shades of Grey” signs of the End Times.

Perkins also addressed the marriage equality ruling, saying he was less concerned about being “on the wrong side of history” than on “the wrong side of the one who’s going to write the final chapter of history.”

The government, he said, had “usurped” issues like marriage and turned “the sacred into the secular.”

“I cannot see a more clear visual representation of where our nation stands,” he said, “than on Friday morning, our courts turned the sacred into the secular and that night, the president bathing the White House in the colors of Pride. God have mercy on America.”

Cliff Kincaid: Impeach Ginsburg & 'Known Lesbian' Kagan Because Of Marriage Ruling

In his latest column, Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy In Media calls on Congress to impeach Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan in the wake of the Supreme Court’s marriage equality decision, saying they were biased in the case because they had both officiated weddings for gay couples and because Kagan is a “known lesbian.”

“Members of Congress taking up this cause will not get sympathetic headlines in the media,” he writes. “But it is something that has to be done if Independence Day is going to have any meaning left at all.”

He adds that a spokesman for Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore’s Foundation for Moral Law had told him that “the failure by Kagan and Ginsburg to withdraw from the case leaves them open to impeachment and removal from the bench.”

Whatever the reason for the putsch, our form of government has been overthrown and another put in its place—a judicial dictatorship that is devoted to elevating to protected status a sexual minority seeking the abolition of traditional values. Left unchecked in its drive for power over others, this cabal threatens not only our heritage but America’s standing in the world as a superpower. It appears the Obama administration wants to spend more money on Pentagon gay pride events and climate change than actual weapons systems to defend America.

As we get ready to celebrate Independence Day, however, we can rest assured that the American people remember enough about the founding of their country that they cannot and will not accept a judicial tyranny. That would make a complete mockery of what July 4th is all about and what millions of Americans have sacrificed for.

Our media didn’t treat it as a big deal, but Justices Elena Kagan and Ruth Bader Ginsburg had both officiated at gay weddings. Groups such as the National Organization for Marriage, the American Family Association, the Coalition of African American Pastors, and the Foundation for Moral Law had called for Kagan and Ginsburg to withdraw from the case.

Matthew Kidd, executive director of the Foundation for Moral Law, told Accuracy in Media that the failure by Kagan and Ginsburg to withdraw from the case leaves them open to impeachment and removal from the bench.

In the case of Kagan, an Obama appointee, she may have had a personal conflict-of-interest. This is a sensitive matter, but various reports indicated that Kagan was a known lesbian before she was nominated to the Court by President Obama. For example, the gay blog QueerTY had identified her as a lesbian. That would mean she was compromised on homosexual issues prior to her ascension to the bench and after she was confirmed. This is a conflict of interest that cannot be tolerated.

Whether the reports of her lesbianism are true or not, we know that Kagan had an extremely radical record as Dean of Harvard Law School (2003 to 2009) where she promoted homosexuality and transgenderism. Nevertheless, she was confirmed to the Supreme Court in a 63 to 37 vote.

We now see the evidence of what happens when the media and Congress fail to do their jobs.

Congress, however, can try to undo some of the damage by holding hearings into the possible impeachment of Justices Kagan and Ginsburg. This would be one way of getting to the bottom of Scalia’s sensational charge that America’s democratic system has been subverted and stolen from the American people.

We are bound to hear that impeachment would be difficult and conviction impossible. There’s always an excuse for not taking bold action in Washington, D.C. But a congressional failure to act, in the wake of Scalia’s extraordinary charge of a judicial Putsch, would suggest that celebrating July 4th means fireworks and nothing more.

I think enough Americans are sufficiently concerned about this matter that they want to see some real fireworks, in the form of Congress exposing the lies, corruption and conflicts of interest that went into the sick and tyrannical gay marriage ruling.

Members of Congress taking up this cause will not get sympathetic headlines in the media. But it is something that has to be done if Independence Day is going to have any meaning left at all.

Ryan Anderson's Road Map for Marriage Resisters

The Heritage Foundation’s Ryan Anderson, celebrated as the anti-marriage movement’s fresh young face, is promoting his new book Truth Overruled: The Future of Marriage and Religious Freedom, which promises to tell anguished opponents of marriage equality how to respond in to the Supreme Court ruling that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to be legally married. Anderson’s book will be available July 20, but there’s probably no need to order it, since he has been flooding the media with his analysis of the ruling and advice about what anti-equality Christians should do in its wake.

Anderson is a protégé of Robert George, the Princeton professor and current intellectual godfather of the anti-gay movement. Like George, Anderson has made the case that the dispute over marriage is not about discrimination but about definition. Same-sex couples cannot be married, they argue, because marriage is by definition a relationship between a man and a woman, “uniting comprehensively, creating new life, and uniting new human beings with their mother and father.”

Anderson repeats that argument in his legal analysis of the Supreme Court’s ruling at Public Discourse, complaining that Justice Anthony Kennedy did not seriously engage with the main arguments of anti-marriage-equality advocates in his majority opinion. Anderson is unmoved by analogies to bans on marriage by interracial couples:

The problem with the analogy to interracial marriage is that it assumes exactly what is in dispute: that sex is as irrelevant to marriage as race is. It’s clear that race has nothing to do with marriage. Racist laws kept the races apart and were designed to keep whites at the top. Marriage has everything to do with men and women, husbands and wives, mothers and fathers and their children, and that is why principle-based policy has defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

Anderson has previously pointed to the anti-abortion movement as the model for long-term resistance to marriage equality. Since the Court’s ruling in Obergefell, Anderson has been more explicit about what the strategy means. In a panel discussion at the Heritage Foundation on June 30, Anderson declared, “The central thesis of my new book…is that the pro-marriage movement is in the same exact situation culturally that the pro-life movement found itself in 42 and a half years ago after Roe v. Wade.”  In the 40 years since the Roe v. Wade decision, that movement has been all too successful at getting legislatures to restrict women’s ability to access reproductive health care, and at convincing courts to go along. In the Boston Globe, Anderson explained how that happened:

The pro-life community stood up and responded to a bad court ruling. Academics wrote books and articles making the scientific and philosophical case for life. Statesmen like Henry Hyde, Edwin Meese, and Ronald Reagan used the bully pulpit to advance the culture of life. Activists and lawyers got together, formed coalitions, and devised effective strategies.

At Heritage, Anderson identified three steps taken by abortion foes that he says must now be pursued by anti-marriage-equality advocates.

  1. Identify the decision as illegitimate judicial activism.
  2. Act to protect the rights of “conscience.”
  3. Wage a long-term campaign of “rebuilding a truthful, strong marriage culture” to “bear witness to the truth” within a culture that has been told a lie, in this case about the nature of marriage. This will be a long-term, “generational” effort, “something our children and grandchildren will be responding to.”

Anderson and other right-wing leaders have certainly been ready to carry out his first piece of advice, denouncing the ruling as judicial activism and, in Anderson’s words, “a significant setback for all Americans who believe in the Constitution, the rule of law, democratic self-government, and marriage as the union of one man and one woman.” His mentor Robert George responded in kind, saying, “we must reject and resist an egregious act of judicial usurpation. We must, above all, tell the truth: Obergefell v. Hodges is an illegitimate decision.” Anderson’s colleague Matthew J. Franck, called it an “appallingly illegitimate decision.”

As for the second step, acting to protect the “rights of conscience,” Anderson says, “There is an urgent need for policy to ensure the government never penalizes anyone for standing up for marriage. We must work to protect the freedom of speech, association, and religion of those who continue to abide by the truth of marriage as one man and one woman.”

Anderson and other anti-equality leaders are pushing for passage of the so-called First Amendment Defense Act in Congress, and for passage of similar laws at the state level. He says that the First Amendment Defense Act would allow individuals, organizations, and businesses to “act on the belief that marriage is the union of a man and a woman” – in other words, to discriminate against same-sex couples without facing any legal consequences.

Just as the pro-life movement ensured that no pro-life citizen would ever have to pay for an abortion or perform an abortion, so too must we work to ensure no one is coerced on marriage. Rather than forcing people and institutions of faith to go to court for their religious liberty, this bill would prevent the government from ever acting unjustly in the first place.

As we noted recently, this strategy has the potential to lead to increasing restrictions on the ability of same-sex couples and their families to experience the equal dignity the Court has said they deserve.

Shortly after the Supreme Court’s ruling in Roe v Wade, laws were passed to allow doctors who had religious objections to performing abortions to refuse to do so without experiencing negative professional consequences. There has been little opposition to such laws. But over the past few decades, at the urging of anti-abortion activists, the scope of that kind of religious exemption has been expanded wildly to include people ever-further removed from the actual abortion procedure, and expanded to include even marginal participation in the provision of contraception. In emergency situations these accommodation could come at high cost, including the life of a patient.

Exemptions have been extended to or claimed by nurses who don’t want to provide care to women after an abortion, pharmacists who don’t want to dispense a morning-after pill prescribed by a woman’s doctor, even a bus driver who refused to take a woman to a Planned Parenthood facility because he said he suspected she was going for an abortion.

Law professors Douglas NeJaime and Reva Siegel describe these as “complicity-based conscience claims” – claims that are about refusing to do anything that might make one complicit in any way with another person’s behavior that one deems sinful. They note that the concept of complicity has been extended to allow health care providers not to even inform patients that some potential care or information has been withheld from them based on the religious beliefs of an individual or the policies of an institution.

The resistance to complying with the requirement under the Affordable Care Act that insurance plans cover contraception takes the notion of complicity to almost surreal lengths.  Just days after the Hobby Lobby decision, the Court’s conservatives sided provisionally with religious conservatives who are arguing that it is a burden on their religious freedom even to inform the government that they are refusing to provide contraceptive coverage, because that would trigger the process by which the coverage would be provided by others. Cases revolving around the simple act of informing the government of an objection are working their way back toward the Supreme Court….

Given what we know about the intensity of the anti-gay movement’s opposition to marriage equality, it is not hard to imagine how far that movement could run with the principle that religious beliefs about “traditional” marriage are a legitimate basis for discriminating against same-sex couples.

As for Anderson’s final step, waging a generational culture war to promote the idea that marriage can only exist between a man and a woman, he offers several strategies:

  1. Conduct “rigorous social science” on family structures, which he says could be used to sway future conservative justices to overturn Obergefell. Anderson is editor of Public Discourse, published by the Witherspoon Institute, which is probably best known for financing the notorious Mark Regnerus study on “family structures,” which anti-equality groups continue to cite even though the study and the way it has been used by marriage equality opponents have been thoroughly discredited.
  2. Use “better spokespeople.” Anderson says the movement should make more use of gays and people raised by same-sex couples who oppose marriage equality.  Anderson complained at Heritage that both groups filed amicus briefs but that the Court did not acknowledge either.
  3. Live out “the truth about marriage” by demonstrating the beauty, truth, and holiness of one-man, one-woman marriage. Anderson acknowledged that gay and lesbian people did not cause family breakdown, heterosexuals did that through contraception, divorce, and other aspects of the sexual revolution. “Justice Kennedy’s philosophy of marriage is the natural result, the logical result, of the past 50 years of the breakdown of the American family. It’s the natural, logical conclusion of the sexual revolution.” Anderson said "We have ourselves to blame” for 50 years of “failing to live out the truth about marriage.”  Still, he said, “redefining marriage will not do anything to strengthen the family; but it will likely make the family even weaker.”

Anderson has achieved folk-hero status among the anti-gay right and many are likely to follow his road map. The National Organization for Marriage is praising his “encouraging words and advice” on how to “continue the fight to defend marriage as it has always been defined – the union between one man and one woman.”

 

Bradlee Dean Warns America That The 'Gay Agenda' Will 'Pervert All Comprehension'

Anti-gay activist Bradlee Dean claimed that LGBT people “are not ruled by law” on Monday’s episode of his “Sons of Liberty” radio program. Dean criticized the media for spreading the “gay agenda,” and attempting to “pervert all comprehension” and “confuse the younger generations.”

Dean briefly touched on the recent Supreme Court marriage decision, advising listeners that “nothing is good enough” for the LGBT community. “You’re gonna be destroyed by those you tolerate,” Dean warned, before urging his followers to “hold these people responsible because they are sick in the mind.”

His rant also included his theory that society is “using the Bruce Jenners of the world” to distract Americans from God’s teaching. “We’re telling you to wake up!” Dean shouted, before continuing into a tirade against the LGBT community.

Though not a politician himself, Dean has regularly worked with fellow Minnesotan  Michele Bachmann. Dean publicly advocates against LGBT rights, and has previously suggested that gay marriage would usher in another Holocaust.

Tom Tancredo: Marriage Equality Will Criminalize Support For The Confederate Flag, Criticism Of Islam

Former Republican congressman Tom Tancredo managed to tie two of the biggest issues of the week together on Tuesday when he railed against efforts to take down Confederate flags, saying that the Koran is an even more dangerous symbol, and then claimed that thanks to the Supreme Court’s recent marriage equality decision, such comments will soon be illegal.

When Newsmax’s Steve Malzberg asked Tancredo to discuss a Facebook post he recently wrote comparing the Confederate flag to the Koran, Tancredo responded that efforts to “erase” the flag are misguided.

“However,” he continued, “there is something else out there, our president really happens to enjoy it, we teach about it in the public schools, we tell people, kids in the public schools to respect it. It’s called the Koran and it’s responsible for far more, far more murders, enslavement, the most horrible things, and it’s still going on. It’s not history, it’s still happening. And that, we don’t ban it, heavens no, we even tell kids we gotta read it in our schools and respect it.”

Malzberg then changed the subject, asking Tancredo about the Supreme Court’s marriage decision, which Tancredo said was connected. Not only will the decision eventually lead to the criminal prosecution of pastors, he claimed, but soon “everything I just said” about the Confederate flag and the Koran will be “outlawed” due to the institution of unconstitutional hate speech prohibitions.

“Mark my words, that’s what’s coming,” he said. “Dark days ahead, Steve.”

Ryan Anderson: Gay Marriage Will Make Sexual Revolution's 'Mess Of Marriage' Worse

Ryan Anderson, senior fellow at Heritage Foundation and founder of “Public Discourse,” joined Eric Metaxas on his show Tuesday to discuss the Supreme Court’s marriage equality ruling.

Anderson provided listeners with a historical backdrop to the ruling, arguing that for “the past 50 years heterosexuals have failed to live out the truth about marriage.” Heterosexuals mistakenly “bought into a bad ideology; it was called the ‘sexual revolution.’” This, he said, made “a mess of the family, whether it was the hook-up culture, pre-marital sex, non-marital childbearing, lots of divorce.”

“And once you have made a mess of marriage in those ways,” Anderson continued, “there’s a certain logic to redefining it to include same-sex couples: if it’s just about consenting adult romance, why not?”

“That whole 50 years has been a problem,” he said. “Same-sex marriage didn’t cause the problem, but same sex marriage will make the problem worse and it will make it harder to create a strong marriage culture.”

Anderson made similar comments earlier this year in response to an interviewer who lamented that “the widespread acceptance of contraception” was “the first domino to fall” on the way to marriage equality.”

Barber: 'Wipe Out' The 'Immoral Scourge Of Same-Sex Marriage'

Last month, the North Carolina legislature overrode the governor's veto to pass a law allowing state officials to refuse to perform marriages or issue marriage licenses to gay couples in the name of "religious liberty," and Matt Barber hailed the development as a "good first step" toward totally eliminating the "sexually immoral scourge of same-sex marriage."

"This is a good first step," Barber said on Liberty Counsel's "Faith and Freedom" radio program today, alongside co-host Mat Staver. "It's a step in the right direction. Ultimately, the endgame here, Mat, is same-sex marriage cannot be. It is a contradiction in terms, it's self-defeating, it's incongruous, it's an oxymoron, it's all of these things and more and it is immoral. So the sexually immoral scourge of same-sex marriage needs to be wiped out here in the United States. That's the endgame."

Barber went on to declared that similar laws need to be passed in every state to protect anti-gay public officials and Christian business owners from having to "participate in sinful behavior, which is a same-sex wedding ceremony."

"It is a pagan rite, a ritual that is anti-Christian, it is counter-Christian and it is sinful," he said, "and so we need more robust religious liberty protection laws in North Carolina and in every state of the union."

Steve King: Impeach Ginsburg & Kagan Over Gay Marriage Decision

Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, said yesterday that he would support impeaching Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan over their participation in the Supreme Court’s marriage equality case whenever “the public is ready” for such proceedings.

King, a guest on Iowa talk radio host Jan Mickelson’s program, took a call from a listener who said of the justices who voted to strike down same-sex marriage bans, “I submit that these are rogue justices and they can be impeached and removed by Congress.”

King told the caller that he agreed with him, but “impeachment itself,, we have learned throughout history, is a political decision” and the timing is “up to the will of the people.”

“That provision does exist, and let’s hear what the public has to say,” he added. “If that were put up before me today, and I think I mentioned Ginsburg and Kagan as being two that had been conducting same-sex marriages on their spare time and did not recuse themselves, I would put up the vote to remove them from office. And I’d like to see that case heard again and it would come down four-to-three and it in the end it would come back to the states for that decision, where it should be. But I don’t know if the public is ready for that.”

Mickelson then asked King about Sen. Ted Cruz’s idea of establishing retention elections for Supreme Court justices — similar to those in Iowa in 2010 that resulted in three state supreme court justices losing their jobs in retribution for marriage equality votes — which King said he thought was “a pretty good idea.”

But in the near term, King said, the nation must turn to “nationwide civil disobedience” in defiance of the marriage decision. He also repeated his plan for states to “abolish civil marriage” in order to deny the benefits and responsibilities of marriage to gay and lesbian couples.

“By doing so we can avoid the litigation that’s coming at every one of our churches,” he said, claiming that gay rights advocates “will not stop until they can force a priest to conduct a same-sex marriage at the altar of a Catholic church.”

Earlier in the program, King went on a long tangent linking the U.S. Constitution not only to the Magna Carta and to Greek and Roman law, but also to the New Testament.

“You can go piece by piece of this all the way through the history of the foundation of western civilization to get to the underpinnings of the pillars of American exceptionalism,” he said. “And we seem to have forgotten about those underpinnings and now we’re at this place where there is no right and wrong and the rule of tyranny of whoever can get leverage in whatever form and five justices in the Supreme Court setting a policy that turns over thousands of years of human experience.”

“This Constitution is rendered an artifact of history if we let this stand,” he warned.

Fischer: 'The Supreme Court Just Gave The Muslim World Another Reason To Attack Us'

On his radio broadcast today, Bryan Fischer highlighted warnings from the FBI and Department of Homeland Security to law enforcement agencies all over the country to "be vigilant and prepared" for possible terrorist attacks over the July 4th holiday and cited them to declare that if any such attacks are carried out, the Supreme Court will be partially to blame for having angered radical Muslims by legalizing gay marriage.

Fischer, who fully believes that God will use ISIS to punish America for gay rights, claims that since "the Left" supposedly blamed anti-Islam activist Pamela Geller when Islamic radicals attacked one of her events back in May, then, by the same logic, the Supreme Court will also be to blame if Islamic terrorists attack the United States in the wake of the gay marriage ruling.

"How does the Muslim world justify their attacks on the United States?" Fischer asked. "Because they believe that we are the chief exporter of wickedness and decadence in the world. That’s why they call us 'the Great Satan.' When we insult their god, their religion, their prophet, or their values, they claim a divine sanction to punish us for our transgressions."

"The Left, interestingly enough, actually agrees with the Muslim world on this score," he continued, citing the Geller attack.

"What the Supreme Court did on Friday was to insult and offend the entire Muslim world by celebrating and gloating gushing over a sin that Muslims regard as so offensive to Allah that its practitioners must be thrown to their deaths," Fischer warned. "So the Supreme Court just gave the Muslim world another reason to attack us, and a terrorist attack appears imminent. So if Muslims attack us, and they refer in any way to our celebration of homosexuality as part of the reason, then according to liberals, culpability must be laid for that at the feet of the United States Supreme Court."

Mat Staver: Kindergartners Will Be Forced Into Same-Sex Relationships Following Supreme Court Marriage Decision

Mat Staver, the founder and chairman of the anti-gay legal group Liberty Counsel, joined Jim Schneider on VCY America on Monday to discuss the potential repercussions of marriage equality. 

Staver’s immediate response to the ruling was that “it’s brought judgment on America.” Repeatedly affirming that he does not consider the “five lawyers” who wrote the decision to be “justices of the United States Supreme Court, although that’s their technical title,” Staver described the ruling as “an opinion of five people that have thrown away millennia of human history, and literally brought judgment upon themselves and, frankly, I think, the nation if the nation accepts what they have done.”

Staver urged conservative Christians to engage in "peaceful resistance” to the Supreme Court’s ruling. Likening the fight against marriage equality to the fight for racial equality, Staver said, “This is the Rosa Parks on the bus. If they tell you to go to the back of the bus because your skin color doesn’t match what they want, don’t go to the back of the bus. This is the time for peaceful resistance, and this is the time to stand with people who are engaged in peaceful resistance.”

“This is the time like of the Nazi Germany when they’d knock on your door,” Staver continued. “‘Is there a Jew in your house?’ Well, if you say 'yes,' than the Jew is dead; if you say 'no,' then you’re dead. What are you gonna do? You gonna protect the person? Or are you gonna save your own skin?”

Responding to Schneider’s fears about the future of public education, Staver argued that we will now witness “the marching of the kids through the public schools and the indoctrination. This is the, this is going to be an assault on them of unprecedented proportions as well.” The Department of Education, he predicted, will soon be ordering schools to tell kindergartners, “‘Hey, you need to experiment as a kindergarten with whether you’re male or female. You need to, like, have some experiments and go out and have same-sex relationships.”

After a caller expressed concern that schoolchildren will be brainwashed into homosexuality, Schneider lamented that even children “growing up in great Christian homes” are beginning to question the immorality of homosexuality because of “what they’re being taught in the schools.”

Staver agreed, urging listeners to “abandon the public schools” because “ this is gonna be a flood of homosexual indoctrination, gender abolition indoctrination, sexual practice experimentation, risky behavior. All this is gonna come on them like a flood.” If you don’t shield your kids from the flood of equality, Staver concluded, “you’re gonna lose your children.”

Alabama Activists Warn Of America’s Destruction, 'Sodomites' Taking Over Education In Wake Of Marriage Decision

Yesterday, the group Sanctity of Marriage Alabama organized a press conference in Montgomery to protest the Supreme Court’s marriage equality decision, which devolved into an unhinged anti-gay rally.

The event featured a number of activists and public officials, including state Public Service Commissioners Chip Beeker and Twinkle Cavanaugh (who are famous for deploying religion in creative ways in their work regulating public utilities); Michele Bachmann mentor and Roy Moore ally John Eidsmoe; and John Killian, chaplain of the Alabama GOP.

Alabama has been center stage of the gay marriage fight since Moore, with the backing of fellow Republicans, used his position as chief justice of the state’s supreme court to order public officials to defy a federal court decision striking down the state’s ban on same-sex marriage.

Beeker, the public service commissioner, kicked things off by calling the Supreme Court’s decision “an assault on God” and on “our Christian heritage” that rendered the 10th Amendment “null and void.”

“A runaway judiciary,” he continued, “is a bigger threat to the United States than ISIS. Liberal judges have done more harm to our country and our Constitution than Al Qaeda."

Not to be outdone, Sanctity of Marriage Alabama spokesman Tom Ford, who called marriage equality part of a “war against God” and a “new invention” the results of which “no one knows.”

But he had some guesses. “The best indication that I have of what it will bring is what we’ve seen in the Bible,” he said. “I can go to Soddom and Gomorrah. In history, we can go to Pompeii, we can go to other places, we can look at Nero in the time of Rome. And in these times God brought destruction, and he also raised up people to speak his truth and he also drew people to himself. And this is our hope.”

He also warned of the dire consequences on children: “If we give our children to the sodomites to educate, when it’s all said and done and they believe that sodomy is okay, why are we surprised?”

Baptist street preacher Tommy Littleton sounded a similar alarm, saying “the human rights issue of our era” is “protecting our children from what is nothing short of gay liberation theology, full sexual liberation.”

“Today we live in probably the most challenging time of our generation, of our nation’s history,” he said, warning of an impending “climate of fear, loss of free speech, loss of religious freedom, and the overwhelming tsunami that is coming against us and our families and our churches and our children.”

After arguing that curriculum standards like Common Core indoctrinate children in homosexuality, he urged the “normal majority” to “rise up and say I don’t want my children to be educated by people who are confused about their own sexuality.”

“Are we really in an honest conversation on the other side or are the LGBT people being used for a much greater and horrendous agenda?” he asked. “I believe they are.”

Becky Gerritson, head of the Wetumpka Tea Party, cited an unfounded right-wing rumor about Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wanting to lower the age of consent to 12 years old to warn that the court’s decision paves the way for adult-child marriage and plural marriage.

She urged the audience to “have compassion” on “future victims of this decision” who will be trapped in plural marriages and all the “horrors that it will play out in their lives.”

Eidsmoe, who works for Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore’s Foundation for Moral Law, hinted at future challenges to the Supreme Court ruling, saying “this is far from over” and referring to legislators and probate judges who are ready to “obey God rather than man.”

The Supreme Court’s decision, he said, “constitutes an illegitimate means of reaching and unconstitutional decision to create an invalid institution to further the perpetration of immoral acts.”

John Hagee: 'This Supreme Court Has Made America The New Sodom And Gomorrah'

On yesterday's "Hagee Hotline," Pastor John Hagee declared that the Supreme Court decision striking down gay marriage bans "has made America the new Sodom and Gomorrah" which must now face the judgment of God.

"The Supreme Court in Washington has handed down its decision in a 5-4 ruling supporting same-sex marriage," Hagee declared. "But the Supreme Court in Heaven has handed down its unanimous decision in a 3-0 ruling from God, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit [that] marriage is exclusively between a man and a woman. Same-sex marriage will never be accepted in Heaven as legitimate, so says God Almighty."

"This Supreme Court has made America the new Sodom and Gomorrah," he continued. "God will have to judge America or He's going to have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah."

Tom DeLay Knows Of Secret DOJ Memo To Legalize '12 New Perversions,' Including Bestiality And Pedophilia

Tom DeLay appeared on Newsmax TV yesterday, where he told host Steve Malzberg that, just as he had predicted, all Hell is now breaking loose because of the Supreme Court ruling striking down gay marriage bans. Things are now so out of control, DeLay said, that he even knows about a "secret memo" from the Justice Department aimed at legalizing "12 new perversions," including bestiality and pedophilia.

"We've already found a secret memo coming out of the Justice Department," DeLay claimed. "They're now going to go after 12 new perversions, things like bestiality, polygamy, having sex with little boys and making that legal. Not only that, but they have a whole list of strategies to go after the churches, the pastors, and any businesses that tries to assert their religious liberty. This is coming and it's coming like a tidal wave."

Malzberg, who was predictably shocked by the news that Department of Justice was now going to seek to legalize things like pedophilia, asked DeLay to clarify that that was what he had just claimed and DeLay assured him that it was.

"That's correct," he said. "They're coming down with 12 new perversions. LGBT is only the beginning. They are going to start expanding it to the other perversions."

Roy Moore's Lawyer Demands Alabama Defy 'Wicked' SCOTUS Ruling, Choose 'God Or Satan'

The head of Alabama’s court system, an employee of notoriously anti-gay Chief Justice Roy Moore, has sent a letter to Gov. Robert Bentley and other state elected officials urging them to defy the Supreme Court’s marriage equality ruling or else “become complicit in the takeover by the wicked,” reports AL.com.

“Public officials are ministers of God assigned the duty of punishing the wicked and protecting the righteous,” Win Johnson, director of legal staff at the state’s Administrative Office of the Court, wrote to the elected officials in a letter obtained by the newspaper. “If the public officials decide to officially approve of the acts of the wicked, they must logically not protect the righteous from the wicked. In fact, they must become protectors of the wicked. You cannot serve two masters; you must pick – God or Satan.”

He continues with a defense of criminal prohibitions on homosexuality: “The criminal laws against homosexual sodomy are for the protection of the righteous, particularly the young, the weak, the vulnerable, who need the law to teach them right from wrong when in a vulnerable state. The U.S. Supreme Court, although it claims to have done so in 2003, cannot take something that God calls a crime and declare it not a crime.”

He then equates compliance with the marriage equality ruling with obedience in Nazi Germany, writing “the civil government must now become a persecuting power; you cannot avoid it.”

Perhaps Johnson is an American Family Radio listener.

UPDATE: In a letter of apology to Gov. Bentley, Johnson said that Moore "reprimanded" him for sending the invective.

Here is the full letter obtained by AL.com:

Time for Public Officials to take their stand one way or the other

Jesus Christ is Lord of all. He came to save the world by His death and resurrection. That world includes you, me, the family, the civil government, all the institutions of life. He came to advance His Father's kingdom, not watch man run rampant upon the earth as if Christ had never come. As if it were the days of Noah!

Public officials are ministers of God assigned the duty of punishing the wicked and protecting the righteous. If the public officials decide to officially approve of the acts of the wicked, they must logically not protect the righteous from the wicked. In fact, they must become protectors of the wicked. You cannot serve two masters; you must pick – God or Satan.

The criminal laws against homosexual sodomy are for the protection of the righteous, particularly the young, the weak, the vulnerable, who need the law to teach them right from wrong when in a vulnerable state. The U.S. Supreme Court, although it claims to have done so in 2003, cannot take something that God calls a crime and declare it not a crime.

We're facing something even worse now, the civil government taking a new step and actually requiring the approval and sanctifying by the state of an evil behavior. Five justices on the U.S. Supreme Court have now opined that the States of this country and all of us must approve of so-called marriages of same sex couples.

Therefore, the civil government must now become a persecuting power; you cannot avoid it. The civil government must protect what it approves of. It must protect the advocates' employment, their business dealings, their lives in every way. Against whom? Against those who think their lifestyle is evil. That's you and me, bible-believing Christians, the Church, etc.

Public official, what will you do? Will you stand up for the law of Alabama, for the people, for the weak and vulnerable, for the law of God? Or will you capitulate? Will you become complicit in the takeover by the wicked?

"I must follow the law," you say. Law? What law? There is no law anymore, there's just opinion. One day this, one day that. When the law becomes merely the opinion of a handful of people on the courts, there is no longer any law. There is tyranny. There is chaos. But there is no law.

The young and the weak, those that are caused to stumble by courts that approve of what is evil, are those whom Jesus referred to when he said, "It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." Luke 17:2. You don't want to be complicit in allowing such stumbling blocks.

Don't use the Nazi war-crimes trial defense: "My superiors (or the courts) told me to do it." You're not standing for the rule of law when you capitulate to a law that defies God and exposes people to the wicked. You're just a coward making excuses!

Or will your conscience cause you to resign? Why would you leave the people of this State, their children, your children and grandchildren to the wolves, those who would rend the society apart with their denial of what's good and evil?

Your duty is to stand against the ravages of a superior authority that would go beyond its rightful power and force upon the people something evil. That's what the founders of our country did when Parliament exceeded its powers. That's what the Puritans in civil government in the 1600's did when the King exceeded his powers.

On Judgment Day, you won't stand in front of the media, the advocates of "Equality," or even the federal courts; you'll stand before the King of Kings, the Judge and Ruler over the Kings of the Earth, Jesus Christ. His law is not subject to the vote of man, and He, asthe good and loving author of that law, does not exempt any nation from it. The law's author, speaking of Himself as "the stone which the builders rejected," said, "Whosoever shall fall upon that stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder." Luke 20:18.

What can you do? You have authority as an elected official. You also are sworn to uphold the U.S. Constitution and Alabama Constitution. Find a way to do so. Don't acquiesce to the takeover (actually the takedown)! Use your authority and every legal angle to oppose the tyrants! If necessary, just say, "No." It is not rebellion for you to say, "Your interpretation of the Constitution is wrong, beyond your authority, and detrimental to this nation." In fact, it's your duty. You're not opposing the rule of law, you're upholding it by saying that.

GOP Rep: Marriage Equality Decision 'Offensive' To Civil War Dead Because They Were 'Fighting To Further A Christian Lifestyle'

Rep. Glenn Grothman, Republican of Wisconsin, joined Milwaukee-area radio host Vicki McKenna on Friday to discuss the Supreme Court’s ruling striking down state bans on same-sex marriage. Grothman told McKenna that the Supreme Court’s reasoning, which was based on the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, was an affront to the Americans who died in the Civil War because it was “a strong religious war to further a Christian lifestyle by getting rid of slavery.”

“Our president during the Civil War was, of course, Abraham Lincoln, who was known as the most biblical of presidents, somebody who quoted the Bible a lot,” he said. "In the Civil War, some 600,000 people died in a country that was much less populated than that today. And it was a much more religious country and I think a lot of people who died fighting in that war felt they died fighting for a religious cause, you know, ‘Battle Hymn of the Republic’ and all that.

“I think it would shock those people who died in that war to find out the constitutional amendment which was ratified kind of as a culmination of their great efforts and their great deaths would be 150 years later, a little less than 150 years later, used by these five robed, arrogant, robed people to take this constitutional amendment and say that that constitutional amendment that was drafted after the Civil War was in fact an amendment designed to say that same-sex marriage had to be legal.”

He added that the decision is “particularly offensive” given that the 14th Amendment was “drafted by a people who felt they had just engaged in a strong religious war to further a Christian lifestyle by getting rid of slavery.”

 

Phyllis Schlafly Proposes Congressional Resolution Affirming The Dignity Of Straight People

Phyllis Schlafly is none too pleased with the Supreme Court’s decision striking down state gay marriage bans, and has a modest proposal for Congress: Pass a resolution affirming the “dignity of opposite-sex married couples,” especially that of couples where “a provider-husband is the principal breadwinner and his wife is dedicated to the job of homemaker.”

While this resolution might not change much in the short term, the anti-feminist crusader writes in her syndicated column today, it might act as an inspiration to the anti-gay movement as they continue to fight marriage equality.

Justice Kennedy's opinion for a 5-4 majority of the Supreme Court has rightly been condemned for its lack of grounding in the constitutional text he is sworn to uphold. Unable to find gay marriage in either the due process clause or the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, Kennedy ultimately rests his case on what Justice Clarence Thomas sarcastically called the "dignity clause" of the Constitution.

There is no such clause, of course, although Kennedy's majority opinion mentioned "dignity" nine times. But if dignity can be conferred by decisions of the Supreme Court, then Congress can do so, too.

Therein lies a first response: Congress should formally recognize the dignity of opposite-sex married couples and resolve to protect that dignity in our laws. A joint resolution should recite the many reasons why the special union of husband and wife has been honored for "millennia," as Kennedy admitted.

A crash program to rebuild the traditional American nuclear family is urgently necessary for continuing our nation's political and economic success in this century. This won't happen if we transform marriage into a means of giving "dignity" to mostly childless homosexuals.

Once Congress is on a roll to confer dignity, it should confer an extra measure of dignity on the single-earner family, where a provider-husband is the principal breadwinner and his wife is dedicated to the job of homemaker, a role more socially beneficial than working in the paid labor force.

After reciting the foregoing reasons and many others, Congress should conclude its resolution by formally resolving that the traditional family, founded on a married husband and wife, carries special dignity and deserves special recognition because it provides unique benefits to society.

This is not to deny that every human person has value and dignity, or that other domestic relationships may have some value in limited circumstances. But Congress should respond to Kennedy with a ringing affirmation of the unique dignity that should be accorded to society's foundational unit: the marriage of husband and wife.

Naysayers will scoff that the foregoing resolution doesn't change the Supreme Court decision, and you can imagine a late-night comedian comparing it to the medal of courage the Wizard of Oz presented to the Cowardly Lion. But movie fans will recall how that gesture inspired Dorothy and her companions toward achieving their goal.

Anti-Gay Pundits Predict Marriage Equality Will Lead To Government Taking Children From Christian Parents

In a discussion yesterday on American Family Radio’s “Sandy Rios in the Morning,” Rios and anti-gay pastor Erwin Lutzer warned that marriage equality will turn American into the Soviet Union as children in public schools who embrace “sexual confusion” will become informants on their parents who will eventually be carted off by the government.

Lutzer argued that with the rise of gay rights, children are “being indoctrinated in ways” equivalent to “Russia of years ago.” Because of this, “parents need to take that responsibility” to overcome “huge barriers” and “ultimate destruction” as “these children are gonna take their own sexual confusion into their families and into their relationships and it’s just going to exponentially multiply. The challenge is absolutely huge.”

“It is huge,” agreed Rios. The prospect of sexual confusion also reminded Rios of “the old Soviet Union,” where children were “indoctrinated all day at school and then they go home and their parents can only whisper their true beliefs to the kids. And then the kids were asked to tattle, to report their parents if they were teaching anything other than what the state was teaching. And so, parental influence dwindled.” Fearing this Orwellian future for America, Rios warned that after the breakup of the Soviet Union, “the only reason people still knew about God was because their grandmothers had told them about God.”

“We’re going to be at war with our government and with culture around us,” Rios continued, “and our children are going to be so delusional – they already are – in culture that it’s going to create a huge line between us and our children. And it’s gonna be tough, tough.”

Arguing for the need for private schooling and homeschooling, Lutzer claimed public schools “are going to be deliberately so confused on this issue that it would be impossible, really, for a Christian child to go through a school without being infected by the terrible teachings that that child is going to receive.”

Recalling an article he had read years ago, Lutzer discussed the existence of “intolerant personality disorder,” and argued that “it’s not beyond reason to think that the time will come when parents that homeschool children, religious parents, will be diagnosed as culturally intolerant and personality intolerant. And therefore, as a result, their children will be taken away from them.”

Rios thought this was “certainly within the realm of possibility” because “we already know that this has been happening for a long time” with diversity training for corporate employees or, as she called them, “reeducation camps.”

“God is bringing judgement to the nation and ushering about the end of all things, really,” Rios concluded.

Sandy Rios: Gay Rainbows Increase Terrorism Threat For America

American Family Association official Sandy Rios warned on her radio program yesterday that the Obama administration’s decision to light up the White House in rainbow colors in celebration of the Supreme Court’s marriage equality decision was “an unbelievable affront to God” that will have “consequences.” According to Rios, God will lift His hand of protection from America in response to the court’s ruling and the celebratory rainbow images, thereby increasing the threat of terror attacks on the United States.

The rainbow, she said, “was God’s sign to mankind that he would never destroy the earth again by flood,” so if “you take his symbol and you use it for a sign of sexual behavior that is ungodly, unallowed,” it will have “some consequence.”  

“My grief is for you, because you don’t understand what you just did. You don’t understand,” she told gay rights activists. “Again, now, to get more practical about this, the terror threat against this nation has gone up exponentially.”

Citing warnings about possible terrorist attacks in America over the  July 4th weekend, Rios declared that, to make matters worse, “it is Ramadan.” Unlike Christians, whom Rios claimed understand the true meaning of the word ‘holy,’ Muslims use the holy month of Ramadan to “fast so that [they] can murder people,” she said.

Rios then pivoted to address gay rights activists, telling them that when you “ignore God” you “do away with his protection,” which is “why we fear for the country and we fear for you too.”

Meanwhile, she said, American Christians have “entered a new era” of persecution where they will be “like believers in Iran and Syria” or “first-century Rome, pagan Rome, China most recently, Russia before the breakup of the Soviet Union. We are entering a time of living in a hostile culture.” 

“We’re gonna see a lot of things change,” warned Rios, “and those of you that stay strong in your personal convictions, you’re gonna have trouble at work, you may lose your jobs. This is a new era, so it’s not for the faint of heart.”

Religious Right legal activist Michael Farris joined Rios later on the program, telling her that after the marriage decision, “I really feel like I’m a stranger living in a strange land. They’ve stolen America from us, and they’ve stolen our heritage and they’ve stolen everything by a five-to-four vote.”

“I don’t think that’s an overstatement,” responded Rios. “The people that won on Friday don’t understand that they have lost terribly. We’ve lost protections of God for this country. We have thumbed our nose at him using his symbol, the rainbow, which was a personal, sacred symbol that he gave to a sign to earth that he would not destroy it again. They have thumbed their nose a God’s design for man, a man and a woman designed from the beginning of time and creation, and it will not, it will not stand. While we’re under such terrible terror threats, you know, our protections have been lifted and that’s what they don’t understand. And they are in the same boat that we’re in so it’s a — it is a sad day for America.”

Michael Farris: Supreme Court Destroyed 'Entire Institution Of Our Courts' In Pursuit Of 'Rainbow Utopia'

Michael Farris, the chancellor of Patrick Henry College and chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association, told Iowa talk radio host Jan Mickelson yesterday that with its ruling striking down bans on gay marriage, the Supreme Court threw out “the entire institution of our courts and our judiciary and respect for the law” in pursuit of a “rainbow utopia.”

Repeating the Religious Right line that Justices Ruth Bader Kingsburg and Elena Kagan should have recused themselves from the case because they have officiated legal same-sex marriages, Farris suggested setting up a “tribunal” to review recusal motions for Supreme Court justices. If such a body existed, Farris insisted, the marriage decision “would have gone 4-3 in the other direction.”

As it is, he said, the Supreme Court just threw the entire institution of the courts out the window: “I have a hard time imagining myself standing before the Supreme Court and saying ‘your honor’ or ‘Justice.’ They’re politicians in black robes, they’re acting as a legislature. And the entire institution of our courts and our judiciary and respect for the law all have been thrown away by the Supreme Court of the United States in pursuit of this rainbow utopia. It’s crazy.”

Farris also discussed ways for churches to avoid public accommodation laws that prohibit businesses from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation, implying that churches will be forced to perform weddings for gay or lesbian couples. (In reality, churches are not forced to perform marriages they disagree with.)

“If a church gets attacked legally on this basis, they should fight, they should defend,” he said, adding that “it’s far, far better to be in trouble with a gay rights group in court than it is to be in trouble with Almighty God for participating in evil.”

Sam Rohrer: Gay Rights Activists Don't Realize They've 'Lost Great, Great Freedom' With Gay Marriage Ruling

Sam Rohrer of the American Pastors Network appeared on The Dove TV yesterday to discuss the Supreme Court decision striking down state bans on gay marriage, where he and host Perry Atkinson warned that the ruling will eventually lead to churches losing their tax-exempt status, having their ministry broadcasts shut down, and seeing their pastors hauled off to jail.

But, Rohrer warned, it is not just anti-gay Christians who have lost their freedom as a result of this ruling, but the entire nation because freedom only exists because of God and America has just booted God out and effectively turned itself into a dictatorship.

"If you want to say, 'God, I don't need you,' then God says, 'Fine, you just go have your own way but you're also going to suffer the consequences of having your own way,'" Rohrer said. "They don't understand, I don't believe, what the end result is going to be because they themselves are going to lose the civil freedom to do a lot of the things in their life that they would like to do that they think are just going to be automatically there, not understanding that the only reason we have civil freedom, the only reason we have a First, and Second, and Third, and Fourth, and Fifth Amendment and so forth is because of the biblical underpinnings that permit it."

"When they throw all of that off, you ultimately go just to the power of those who happen to be in office at that point," he continued, "and it's dictatorship. I guarantee you, those right now who think they are savoring the moment because they think they have won have actually lost great, great freedom."

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious