Bryan Fischer, who last week explained how Bill Clinton was responsible for the rise in oral cancer, is back with another attack on JC Penney for hiring Ellen DeGeneres, this time claiming it will lead to more depression, suicide, and breast cancer among women who become lesbians due to the store's choice of spokesperson:
Will America’s young women be just a bit more likely to experiment with lesbianism now that JCPenney is mainstreaming it? Too any objective observer, the answer must be yes. Is this a good thing? To any objective observer, the answer must be no.
Research has indicated that lesbians suffer from increased levels of depression, suicidal ideation, substance abuse, breast cancer and vaginal diseases compared to heterosexual women.
Thus what JCPenney has done, by increasing, even if ever so slightly, the chances that young women will experiment with this behavior will turn out to be a tragic thing for some. JCPenney will have to share some culpability for that.
The problem with pre-recorded radio shows is that they don’t necessarily keep up with the news. On his radio alert today, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins pays tribute to the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation for cutting off funding for breast cancer screenings and mammogram referrals at Planned Parenthood clinics. Apparently, no one at the FRC thought it was a good idea to pull the bulletin as last week Komen backed down from its move to defund Planned Parenthood, and listeners might be confused while Perkins is “tickled pink” about Komen.
After seven years of sitting out Susan G. Komen events, pro-lifers can finally get back in the Race! Hello, I'm Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C. Pro-lifers aren't just happy--they're tickled pink about America's biggest breast cancer charity. After a seven-year partnership, Susan G. Komen finally cut ties with Planned Parenthood. Most people never understood the relationship to begin with. One group was setting out to save lines, and Planned Parenthood committed to ending them. But, since 2005, Komen sent millions of dollars to the abortion giant for breast cancer screenings. Then the news broke. Planned Parenthood didn't need the money for mammograms, because it never offered them! All they do are manual breast exams, which the NIH calls ineffective. Liberals are bashing the Foundation for politicizing the issue, but in reality, Komen's just trying to be a good steward. Planned Parenthood's under investigation by Congress for everything from fraud and criminal cover-ups. Any legitimate organization would walk away! It's just too bad the federal government isn't one of them.
The main argument that anti-abortion activists and legislators tend to give in justifying the increasingly strict requirements like ultrasounds and face-to-face visits with a doctor and waiting periods is that women should be given access to as much information as possible to allow them to make informed decisions.
But that does not appear to be a motivation behind legislation in Kansas, which would protect doctors who refuse to provide women with information that, were they informed, might lead them to choose an abortion:
A Kansas House committee is scheduled to take up a bill Wednesday that would exempt doctors from malpractice suits if they withheld medical information to prevent an abortion. The measure would also take away tax credits for abortion providers, remove tax deductions for the purchase of abortion-related insurance coverage and require women to hear the fetal heartbeat. The bill includes several provisions, which passed in other states and now face federal lawsuits. The bill would also require women be told about potential breast cancer risks from abortions, even though medical experts discount such a connection.
Among the most contested provisions of the bill is the section that would exempt a doctor from a medical malpractice suit if a woman claims the physician withheld information about potential birth defects to prevent her from having an abortion. In addition, a woman would not be able to sue if she suffers health damage from a pregnancy as a result of information withheld from her to prevent an abortion. A wrongful death suit could still be filed, however, if the mother died.
Self-proclaimed prophet Cindy Jacobs and her husband Mike recently hosted Rebecca Greenwood, who like Jacobs is a leading figure in the New Apostolic Reformation, to discuss ways how to cast demons out of people who view pornography. Like American Family Association spokesman Bryan Fischer, Mike blamed incidents of oral sex on President Bill Clinton. He said that Clinton helped bring about “an outpouring of demonic into our nation” as “kids started having sex parties where they were having oral sex” because Clinton “took it out of the dimension of being wrong.”
The Bible talks about the sins of the fathers, that doesn’t necessarily mean your natural father. I remember some years ago when the President of the United States was caught engaging in oral sex. Cindy and I talked to ourselves and we said, this is going to open a door that is going to cause an outpouring of demonic into our nation. We’ve seen that happen, I believe you can show statistically that things that we did not encounter, that were not an issue in our nation, all of the sudden, kids started having sex parties where they were having oral sex. Why? Because the President said because, ‘oh that’s not really sex.’ So it took it out of the dimension of being wrong and so it opened the door for the future generations.
In today’s prayer alert, the Family Research Council boasted that as a result of their pressure campaign against the Girl Scouts “their cookie sales are suffering.” The FRC has long attacked the Girl Scouts over discredited allegations that the Girl Scouts work with Planned Parenthood to promote “casual sex” and train girls about living with HIV. Ironically, while the FRC is hounding the Girl Scouts over the unfounded charges, the group criticized the tactics of “Planned Parenthood’s activist machine” which put pressure on the Susan. G. Komen for the Cure Foundation to restore ties with the women’s health organization.
Although “none of the money” from Girl Scout cookie sales “is given to any other group,” that hasn’t stopped FRC from asking for prayers against the Girl Scouts. The prayer alert says the “Scouts had better confess their errors” and stop “collaborating with Planned Parenthood,” and even cites a passage from Matthew 27 on the suicide of Judas Iscariot to imply that the Girl Scouts are taking blood money.
Planned Parenthood - The victory for the Susan G. Komen Foundation was short lived in breaking away from the largest private and tax funded abortion business in America. Planned Parenthood's activist machine so bludgeoned Komen that they agreed to reverse their stand. The Girl Scouts, whose leadership has been collaborating with Planned Parenthood for years, have found out and their cookie sales are suffering. This is very sensitive for the Scouts. The Scouts had better confess their errors and make a clean break while they can. Yet Planned Parenthood doesn't let its captives go easily.
May Congress expose and defund Planned Parenthood and may private organizations refuse to submit to shakedowns by Planned Parenthood and others in the abortion advocacy industry. May the Pro-life Majority grow in America until abortion has been abolished (Ex 23:2; Dt 21:1-9; 2 Kg 24:2-4 Pr 20:11; 24:11-12; Mt 27:4-6; Eph 5:11-14).
On a related note, the Family Research Council will be hosting a webinar entitled "Healthcare Mandate: Violating the Separation of Church and State," which is strange because they always insist that the separation of church and state doesn't even exist.
Focus on the Family president Jim Daly will speak at Liberty University's convocation tomorrow.
Finally, in a move nobody could have ever seen coming, Karen Handel has resigned from the Susan G. Komen Foundation.
Robert Knight of the American Civil Rights Union today railed against legislation in Maryland in a column, “Counterfeit Marriage is Anti-Religion,” arguing that marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples “violates the very essence of marriage.” According to Knight, legalizing same-sex marriage would do “incalculable” damage to religious freedom and would endanger the future of society because where “marriage is weak, devalued or redefined, communities fail.” “Whatever the expressed good intentions behind the same-sex ‘marriage’ legislation,” Knight writes, “creating a counterfeit and then forcing it down people's throats is straight out of George Orwell's Newspeak in 1984”:
Maryland's proposed Civil Marriage Protection Act, which would legalize same-sex "marriage," is not about tolerance.
It's about using the law to force people to recognize a counterfeit as the real thing. In fact, it should more accurately be called the Attack on Religious Freedom Enabling Act.
That's because this is about more than the feelings of any two people. When you declare a couple "married," with the force of the law behind it, you bring everyone into it.
A brideless or groomless couple is not merely an addition to the marriage definition; it violates the very essence of marriage by excluding one or the other complementary sex.
Marriage over the millennia on all continents has meant the uniting of male and female. Customs have varied, but sex is universally channeled into marriage to protect children and families -- the lifeblood of communities. Where marriage is weak, devalued or redefined, communities fail.
Whatever the expressed good intentions behind the same-sex "marriage" legislation, creating a counterfeit and then forcing it down people's throats is straight out of George Orwell's Newspeak in 1984. Compassionate motives cannot mask the inevitable bad outcomes of a bad law.
I urge legislators to consider that the drive to legally impose same-sex "marriage" is neither inevitable nor irreversible, despite the media's blatantly biased treatment of this issue.
However, should Maryland take this step, the damage to freedom -- particularly religious freedom -- could be incalculable.
When Jerry Boykin decided to withdraw from a scheduled speaking engagement at West Point’s National Prayer Breakfast tomorrow, he said he did so in order to avoid causing any distraction for the Army leadership stemming from his long history of anti-Muslim activism.
Appearing on Fox News yesterday to discuss the controversy, Boykin was asked by Megyn Kelly about some of his past statements, including his view that Muslims ought to be banned from immigrating to, and building mosques in, America - views which Boykin is now attempting to distance himself from by claiming he was merely opposing the so-called "Ground Zero Mosque":
Of course, if you actually watch the video of Boykin's original statement to Bryan Fischer, which we captured and posted last year, it is very obvious that Boykin was not simply talking about the "Ground Zero Mosque" but was, in fact, agreeing with Fischer'swell-knownviews that Muslims ought to be banned from immigrating to America and building mosques.
In fact, Fischer even asked Boykin how he would respond to those who say Muslims have a First Amendment right to build houses of worship, to which he replied that Islam is not a religion and therefore doesn't deserve First Amendment protections, so it is pretty clear that Boykin was not merely talking about the "Ground Zero Mosque" but talking about the building of mosques in general ... especially since he said specifically "no mosques in America":
Fischer: What do you think we ought to do with regard to our immigration policies and with regard to issuing permits to build mosques in order to build mosques in order to deal with this threat, immigration and mosque building, what do you think we should do?
Boykin: Seal the borders and eliminate sanctuary cities and they’ll go home. No mosques in America. Islam is a totalitarian way of life; it’s not just a religion.
Fischer: Now how do you respond to the First Amendment? Now I believe the same thing that you do, we should not allow the building of any more mosques in America, everyone is a potential recruiting or training ground for terrorist activity. They will bring the First Amendment up, your response when people say they have a First Amendment right to build their mosque anywhere they want.
Boykin: If it’s a religion that’s the truth. But Islam, we need to think Sharia, it is not just a religion it is a totalitarian way of life. A mosque is an embassy for Islam and they recognize only a global caliphate, not the sanctity or sovereignty of the United States.
The American Family Association’s division OneMillionMoms is receiving help on its campaign to compel JC Penney to fire Ellen DeGeneres as the retailer’s spokesperson because she is a openly gay. Vic Eliason, the host of Voice of Christian Youth America’s flagship program Crosstalk, today encouraged listeners to stop shopping at JC Penney and also to boycott Starbucks because of the coffee company’s support of a marriage equality bill in Washington. Eliason said that people are “letting Sodom and Gomorrah come walking in the door” and bring in a “corruption that is literally putrefying our families.” “Does it offend you,” Eliason asked, when retailers are “putting icons before you and your kids who are known, and according to some, flaming homosexuals?”
Does it offend you? Are you offended by this or are you kind of just ‘ho hum, so be it’? There comes a time when there needs to be a holy rejection of corruption that is literally putrefying our families. It’s time, long overdue, and too many people are sitting back and just letting Sodom and Gomorrah come walking in the door. Walking in the door? Good grief, it’s already in the door, you can’t even turn your TV set on without being slammed in the face with some commercial with anything from body parts to who knows what all, personal products and things of a nature that weren’t even considered appropriate to be parading in front of our little kids. Now little kids in the first and the second and the third grade are being trained to know that being gay is O.K. and we don’t want to say anything bad about that because that would be bullying.
Does it offend you, when you hear what retailers now—putting icons before you and your kids who are known, and according to some, flaming homosexuals?