Christian Broadcasting Network host Charlene Israel interviewed Dr. Linda Mintle yesterday about a Pennsylvania bill geared at preventing anti-LGBT discrimination, which Mintle warned would turn Christians into “bigots” by turning “issues of morality” into “civil rights issues.” “No one has tolerance for the view of the Christian who has a different approach,” Mintle lamented.
She even asserted that the bill would harm survivors of rape and sexual abuse.
On this week's "Hagee Hotline," Matthew Hagee responded to a question from a viewer about how she should respond to people who support the separation of church and state by telling her that such people will ultimately have to answer to God for believing this deception.
Claiming that the government uses the idea of separation of church and state to discourage Christians from getting involved in politics, Hagee said that one's faith must determine how they vote.
"As a Bible-believer," Hagee counseled, "you should never vote for someone who is pro-abortion. According to Bible standards ... they're pro-murder."
As for those who believe in the separation of church and state, Hagee said that he "would like to see what God's opinion of your position is when you meet him in eternity":
Conservative talk show host Stan Solomon is obsessed with the idea that President Obama is fomenting a race war in order to murder white, Christian heterosexuals, so when we noticed he was hosting a special “Race In America” program to commemorate the March on Washington, we knew we had to watch. Solomon -- who regularly interviews conservative figures including Phyllis Schlafly, E.W. Jackson, Larry Pratt and Alan Keyes -- used the occasion to deliver an epic rant accusing Jews, gays, African Americans and Muslims of being pawns of the Satanic left, hailing the murder of Trayvon Martin and announcing that he hopes “that faggot” Dan Savage dies.
Listen to me carefully. No you don’t, kiss my Obama, I don’t give a damn what you do, I know what I’m going to do and I know what people with an ‘I’ and a ‘Q’ are going to do. The left, which is godless and serves Satan, has an agenda. To accomplish their agenda they have to get idiots, morons, numbnuts to do stupid things so the focus will be on them and not on the libs, not on the leftists. Jews, homosexuals, blacks, gays, Islamists, you may think they’re disparate groups, they’re not, they’re all tools. Because while we’re mad at these two punks, we’re mad at Trayvon Martin, that thug that deserves to be dead and I’m glad he’s dead.
Pieces of crap, homosexuals like what’s that one guy’s name? [Dan] Savage. That faggot. That horrible, awful, terrible excuse for a human being who is at the White House promoting attacks on Christians. I hope he dies — he probably will — of every disease known. By the way, I’m sending him a fire hydrant for his birthday, I’m hoping he’ll sit on it; he’ll slide all the way down to the ground. Sorry fire hydrant fans, I don’t mean to insult fire hydrants.
At any rate, do you understand what I’m saying here? These groups are being recruited. Environmentalists, nuclear freeze, it doesn’t make a difference what group it is. If you put anything ahead of doing what’s right in God’s eyes, or better yet ignoring the reality of God, then you’re a tool, you’re a useful idiot.
Solomon then called on his white viewers to buy guns to protect themselves against black and Latino “terrorists.”
“If you’re white, you’re a target,” Solomon contended. “Get a gun, know how to use it, never be without it and don’t leave your family unprotected.” He warned that black and Latino public school and college students are “terrorists in training” who are “being taught” to hate white people.
“You have to go to college and admit, ‘Oh if you’re white it’s unfair.’ Pretend like you’re black, pretend like you’re a homosexual, which means you are sick and stupid and ignorant and going to die, early,” Solomon continued.
“If somebody comes at you—I don’t give a damn if you’re white, black, pink or purple—and you’re not sure, shoot him and find out later. It’s better to be judged by twelve than carried by six.”
“George Zimmerman knows all about that,” co-host “Chief” Steve Davis replied.
But it didn’t end there.
Solomon, not one to hold back on making racist jokes about Michelle Obama, attacked the first lady over her promotion of healthy eating among youth: “They have that Michelle O-Buick butt Obama’s you know, by the way, she doesn’t eat that crap, she eats like a garbage disposal at a fast food joint. Actually, they might name one after her….They just eat the biggest junk in the world.”
He said he wouldn’t say anything about Malia and Sasha Obama, “except that I wish them the best having crap for parents.”
Robertson made the comment on Tuesday’s broadcast of the 700 Club, which his producers then edited out of the version of the show posted online. Luckily, Right Wing Watch found the missing section of the video on the 700 Club’s YouTube account before the network yanked that as well. Since then, Robertson’s Christian Broadcasting Network has been trying desperately to remove our copies of the video from YouTube – an effort that has just brought moreattention to Robertson’s comments.
On his radio show today, Glenn Beck explained to his listeners was is "really" going on with the talk of possible military action against Syria over its use of chemical weapons against civilians, revealing that the entire thing is part of a progressive/UN plot to create a one-world government.
Saying that it made no sense that the US would intervene militarily in Syria when it did nothing during the Rwanda genocide nearly twenty years ago, Beck explained that progressives in the US and around the world are seeking to weaken the United States' position as the lone superpower and are therefore pushing the nation toward a military conflict with Russia and China over Syria in order to allow the UN to step in and broker a peace deal that averts World War III and results in the establishment of a One World Government:
In an American Thinker column today, Robert Oscar Lopez – a professor, columnist, gay erotic novelist, and anti-gay activist who has been lauded by groups such as the National Organization for Marriage – attacks former Republican Sen. Scott Brown for supporting the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and defending New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, claiming that these positions are the result of the sexual abuse that Sen. Brown experienced as a child.
Lopez is upset that Brown wants to open the GOP to include “rich corporate homosexuals who are interested in having in vitro kids by surrogate moms and shutting up anyone who objects” and that he has defended Christie, who recently signed into a law a ban on ex-gay therapy for minors. Lopez then goes into detail about Brown’s nude photo shoot for Cosmopolitan when he was 22 years old.
“Something tells me that someone who feels comfortable disrobing in front of a camera and being gawked at by masturbating strangers won't fully understand why many men and women would want to keep Don't Ask Don't Tell in place,” Lopez writes.
“It isn't as if Scott Brown has been sexually abused himself -- oh wait, yes, he was. Like many women who are sexually assaulted and later become strippers or prostitutes, Scott Brown probably dealt with his sexual trauma by modeling nude ten years after being mauled at a camp.”
Lopez argues that because Brown “dealt with male-male sexual abuse his way,” he must think that “other men should have to figure things out on their own,” rather than seek ex-gay therapy: “He expects other men who don't want to be sexually mauled by homosexuals to be stuck showering inches away from them in Army barracks with no recourse to therapy to avoid falling into homosexual behavior themselves as a consequence of the trauma.”
He claims that due to the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, thousands of soldiers have “fallen victim to the sexual anomie” of the military. Christie and Brown, Lopez writes, have succumbed “to their respective worldly vices: posing nude and binge-eating,” and shouldn’t be “anywhere on the national Republican ticket in 2016.”
“[T]o Hades with them both. I'm sick of this crap.”
(HT: RWW reader Matthew Briol)
There is no mention from Scott Brown at all of social conservatives who worry about religious freedom, the sanctity of marriage, and the rights of children to be raised by a mom and dad. (If I were libertarian, I wouldn't be wild about Brown's commentary, either.) So we have a pretty clear idea of what kind of big spenders Scott Brown wants in his "big tent." (Can we please find a new cliché?) I'm thinking rich corporate homosexuals who are interested in having in vitro kids by surrogate moms and shutting up anyone who objects.
Nowhere did Scott Brown mention the fact that Chris Christie had just signed into law a moronic statute making it illegal for minors to get therapy to avoid homosexual behavior. Christie was not content merely to sign this stupid law and join an elite class of like-minded governors including Jerry Brown (who signed the first state ban against "ex-gay" therapy in California). He also belly-flopped into the realms of psychobiology and theology, insisting that gay people are born that way and that homosexuality isn't a sin. To say such a thing, he had to have never read the actual research by sexologists who can find no proof of genetically caused homosexuality. He also must have never read a book called the Bible.
He did pose nude in the early 1980s, and come to think of it, that should have set off alarms in Republican minds when they were hyping up his run for Teddy Kennedy's old seat. Something tells me that someone who feels comfortable disrobing in front of a camera and being gawked at by masturbating strangers won't fully understand why many men and women would want to keep Don't Ask Don't Tell in place.
It isn't as if Scott Brown has been sexually abused himself -- oh wait, yes, he was. Like many women who are sexually assaulted and later become strippers or prostitutes, Scott Brown probably dealt with his sexual trauma by modeling nude ten years after being mauled at a camp. Perhaps he feels that because he dealt with male-male sexual abuse his way, other men should have to figure things out on their own.
He gets to showcase his wounds in interviews and write a book about the whole experience. He expects other men who don't want to be sexually mauled by homosexuals to be stuck showering inches away from them in Army barracks with no recourse to therapy to avoid falling into homosexual behavior themselves as a consequence of the trauma. And now, if a man feels threatened by a homosexual aggressor in the military the way Scott Brown was threatened by a male aggressor when he was ten, there will soon be no chaplains to consult in faith-based terms. The chaplaincy is slowly being cleansed of anybody who doesn't rubberstamp the gay lobby's ideology.
Welcome to Scott Brown's and Chris Christie's brave new world of strong national security: instead of banning discussion of homosexual acts in high-risk situations where naked young soldiers are vulnerable, use the police powers of the state to ban discussion of things that young people with homosexual attractions can do other than become adult homosexuals.
We had to repeal the Don't Ask Don't Tell law to see what was in it -- pace Nancy Pelosi -- and now that the law is gone, we have several thousand more men who've fallen victim to the sexual anomie that supporters of Don't Ask Don't Tell, unlike Scott Brown, rightly feared. I am sure that the new laws banning ex-gay therapy will give us more of the same theatrics.
Both Scott Brown and Chris Christie can't connect dots. This whole recent fracas began when Christie bashed Rand Paul for worrying about a police state and then bashed Paul and Jindal for being too much like college professors. Scott Brown, apparently as much of an airhead as Christie, has jumped into his little dinghy, and the two of them want to row off to some island in an alternate universe where conservatives don't care about government interfering with their therapy sessions, stifling their religious beliefs, and listening in to their phone calls. What's important is landing big donors, winning, and succumbing to their respective worldly vices: posing nude and binge-eating. Why think when you can just stuff your mouth, strip naked for a photog, and shout your mouth off in Jersey and Boston accents? So I say, to Hades with them both. I'm sick of this crap.
To paraphrase a line from a great Gilded Age novel, "it is much safer to be fond of dangerous people." In this day and age, with the gay lobby wielding tremendous power and influence, it's safer to agree with them than to get into arguments with them.
Except if you want to run for national office as a Republican. If either Brown or Christie ends up anywhere on the national Republican ticket in 2016, I am voting third party or writing in someone else. I think all conservatives should draw a bright red line at this point.
Rep. John Fleming was the guest on "WallBuilders Live" today, discussing his effort to prevent the military from creating positions for atheist chaplains. After Fleming alleged that the proposal itself was nothing more than an effort to drive religion out of the military, David Barton blamed the entire thing on the Supreme Court, delivering a convoluted argument alleging that atheism is itself a religion and therefore should be banned from public school in the name of separation of church and state:
The Supreme Court opened the door to all of this. Back in decisions like U.S. vs Seeger and others, the court, in their dislike for traditional religion, they defined religion as whatever someone believes so sincerely and so strongly that it affects the way they act.
Now, if that's the case, by the court's definition, atheism and humanism would be religious because they affect the way people act. But if that's the case, then why don't we have the separation of church and state with them, if they're a religion?
Darwinism and evolution is a religion. Why don't we say 'hey, we can't teach Darwinism in school. That affects the way people behave. I demand separation of church and state. Get Darwinism out of the classroom.'
Or why don't we say 'hey, I don't see any prayers going at graduation; that's atheism! I demand separation of church and state. Atheism has chaplains, they're a religion. Get atheism out of the schools.'
Hmmm, so not having prayer in school is now a violation of the separation of church and state? So what is the solution? To require prayer? Because that's somehow not a violation?
Gary Bauer told members of the Campaign for Working Families that if Martin Luther King Jr. were alive today, he would be an anti-abortion activist fighting Planned Parenthood, which Bauer falselysuggested is attempting to commit blackgenocide:
Far from promoting Planned Parenthood's agenda, Reverend King would expose its racist roots and point out that it deliberately locates abortion facilities in inner city communities. He would weep at that fact, which has resulted in more than 20 million aborted black babies, a death toll the KKK could not reach in its most deranged dreams.
Words are inadequate for me to say how honored I was to be the recipient of the Margaret Sanger Award. This award will remain among my most cherished possessions. While I cannot claim to be worthy of such a signal honor, I can assure you that I accept it with deep humility and sincere gratitude. Such a wonderful expression of support is of inestimable value for the continuance of my humble efforts.
Again let me say how much I regret that at the last minute urgent developments in the civil rights movement made it impossible for me to be in Washington to personally receive the award. My wife brought glowing echoes of the wonderful reception and impressiveness of the total occasion.
I am happy to be the recipient of the Margaret Sanger Award and I can assure you that this distinct honor will cause me to work even harder for a reign of justice and a rule of love all over our nation.
Martin Luther King Jr.
Bauer may also want to read King’s essay on the importance of family planning and groups like Planned Parenthood for the African American community:
There is a striking kinship between our movement and Margaret Sanger's early efforts. She, like we, saw the horrifying conditions of ghetto life. Like we, she knew that all of society is poisoned by cancerous slums. Like we, she was a direct actionist — a nonviolent resister. She was willing to accept scorn and abuse until the truth she saw was revealed to the millions. At the turn of the century she went into the slums and set up a birth control clinic, and for this deed she went to jail because she was violating an unjust law. Yet the years have justified her actions. She launched a movement which is obeying a higher law to preserve human life under humane conditions. Margaret Sanger had to commit what was then called a crime in order to enrich humanity, and today we honor her courage and vision; for without them there would have been no beginning. Our sure beginning in the struggle for equality by nonviolent direct action may not have been so resolute without the tradition established by Margaret Sanger and people like her. Negroes have no mere academic nor ordinary interest in family planning. They have a special and urgent concern.
Recently the subject of Negro family life has received extensive attention. Unfortunately, studies have overemphasized the problem of the Negro male ego and almost entirely ignored the most serious element — Negro migration. During the past half century Negroes have migrated on a massive scale, transplanting millions from rural communities to crammed urban ghettoes. In their migration, as with all migrants, they carried with them the folkways of the countryside into an inhospitable city slum. The size of family that may have been appropriate and tolerable on a manually cultivated farm was carried over to the jammed streets of the ghetto. In all respects Negroes were atomized, neglected and discriminated against. Yet, the worst omission was the absence of institutions to acclimate them to their new environment. Margaret Sanger, who offered an important institutional remedy, was unfortunately ignored by social and political leaders in this period. In consequence, Negro folkways in family size persisted. The problem was compounded when unrestrained exploitation and discrimination accented the bewilderment of the newcomer, and high rates of illegitimacy and fragile family relationships resulted.
For the Negro, therefore, intelligent guides of family planning are a profoundly important ingredient in his quest for security and a decent life. There are mountainous obstacles still separating Negroes from a normal existence. Yet one element in stabilizing his life would be an understanding of and easy access to the means to develop a family related in size to his community environment and to the income potential he can command.
This is not to suggest that the Negro will solve all his problems through Planned Parenthood. His problems are far more complex, encompassing economic security, education, freedom from discrimination, decent housing and access to culture. Yet if family planning is sensible it can facilitate or at least not be an obstacle to the solution of the many profound problems that plague him.