Rep. Lankford Doubles Down, Defends Comments on Employers Being Able to Fire Gay Employees

Rep. James Lankford (R-OK) earlier this week told Think Progress that being gay is a “sexual preference” and a “choice issue,” and that he wouldn’t support employment protection legislation because people aren’t born gay. While speaking with Family Research Council president Tony Perkins today on Washington Watch Weekly, Lankford insisted that being gay is a behavioral choice and people shouldn’t receive “special privileges” for it in the workplace:

Perkins: The idea there is they’re looking for special protections; your point is that everybody should be treated equally, no one should be fired or denied employment based upon their sexual orientation, in the ideal world we won’t even know about it, why would we even ask that question?

Lankford: Right. But neither should you have a situation where no one can fire you because of your behavior outside of the workplace, we also should not be in a situation where there are special protections extended to say ‘if I have a certain sexual behavior then you can no longer fire me, I’m a protected class and I can do whatever I want in the workplace,’ that’s not true either. So we are trying to be able to keep that balance, when you say you create special rights you also create special privileges and protections to say that they are untouchable in the workplace and they can have any kind of work conduct they choose to on that, that’s not correct. This is one of those instances where we look at every individual as created in the image of God, every person as valuable to God but every person has to be able to show that they are going to work hard and do the right thing in the workplace and outside.

He also spoke with Perkins and American Family Association president Tim Wildmon on Today’s Issues where he distorted the Think Progress report while accusing them of misrepresenting what he said, which he apparently doesn’t realize is on video.

Perkins: This is really a case study on how the left is working these days, what they do is they go and they try to ambush somebody and get them to say something or say something and take it completely out of context in which they made those comments, they slap a false headline on it, and then they feed that to the more, and I say more not ‘completely,’ legitimate news outlets, it gets on to places like MSNBC and they just hound it. I wonder though, Congressman, does this really get beyond the liberal media? How many normal people actually watch these things and respond to them?

Lankford: Well, it depends on what they are picking up and what they are reading and who else picks it up. When they throw an inflammatory headline out there saying, ‘Congressman Supports Firing People Because They Are Gay,’ then immediately people begin to pick it up and say ‘oh goodness.’ Of course when you read the story, there is no story in it, there is no fact to that headline, but it even reached into Fox News.

Actually, that wasn’t the headline, which is: “GOP Rep. Lankford Explains Why It Should Be Legal To Fire Someone For Being Gay: ‘It’s A Choice Issue.’Think Progress did not claim that Lankford wants to fire people for being gay but said he thinks it should be legal for employers to do so.

Immediately following Lankford’s appearance, Wildmon lashed out at LGBT-rights advocates for their “vile, wicked, [and] evil ways,” which he says reveals “the depravity of that lifestyle,” while Perkins astoundingly maintained that the Religious Right never speaks poorly of the LGBT community:

Wildmon: These homosexual and lesbian, transgender, bisexual, I don’t know if there’s any other word left that they are using now, these activists out there, they act in the most vile, wicked, evil ways, I’m telling you.

Perkins: Everything they accuse Christians of doing, which they don’t generally do, I have not found many on this side, if they do they are not acting in the character of Christ, but they do everything they accuse everybody else of doing.

Wildmon: Oh yeah, they will threaten you, they will call you names, they will post things on your Facebook pages and things like that and it just shows the depravity of that lifestyle, quite frankly, not all of them but a lot of the activists, man they are vile.

Jeffrey Kuhner: Gays and Lesbians ‘Are Even Worse Than the Radical Islamists’

Washington Times columnist and Edmund Burke Institute president Jeffrey Kuhner appeared on The Janet Mefferd Show yesterday where he said that members of the LGBT community “are even worse than the radical Islamists” and more terrifying than the dictators he often writes about, calling them “the most fanatical, hate-filled…and intolerant people I’ve ever met.”

Listen:

Kuhner: As a journalist I write on a wide range of issues, I write on the Communist Chinese, I write on Putin’s regime, I write on brutal dictatorships over the world, the gay, lesbian, transgender community, the LGBT community, is the most intolerant than I have ever witnessed, they are even worse than the radical Islamists. I get death threats, my family is threatened, they call on me to be fired, they want to destroy my career. I have never seen people as intolerant, as malicious, as so desperate to engage in smear and slander and libel as people and activists in the LGBT community, it is really despicable. So for them to run around and say over and over again, all we want is tolerance, all we want is respect for diversity, all we want is respect for civil rights, it is a complete lie. They don’t practice what they preach, they are some of the most fanatical, hate-filled, and I’m choosing my words very carefully, and intolerant people I’ve ever met. I believe that Middle America does not understand the full threat posed by the homosexual agenda and the homosexual lobby.

Kuhner warned that the sitcom “Will and Grace” and romantic comedies that include “the loveable, fuzzy gay person,” which he claimed are “a form of cultural Marxism,” give “us very much a false picture” of the “vulgarity” that is “at the heart of the homosexual lifestyle”:

Kuhner: You wouldn’t believe the vulgarity, the coarseness, the permissiveness, the promiscuity at the heart of the homosexual lifestyle. And so if you actually saw it with your own eyes, and you actually saw the physical damage, and the psychological damage and the emotional damage that comes from living this lifestyle over many years, if the American people would see that with their own eyes I think they would have a very, very different conclusion and very different take. So what we’re getting is, it’s a form of cultural Marxism. You’re getting propaganda. And if you notice, it’s “Will and Grace” on television, I can’t go see a romantic comedy now without, there’s always the loveable, fuzzy gay person who just wants to be accepted for who he is, he’s completely harmless. So they’re giving us very much a false picture.

Mefferd mentioned Kuhner’s column, “Obama’s Homosexual America,” about President Obama’s endorsement of marriage equality, which he said will lead to “civilizational collapse” and a possible “political-cultural civil war” that will determine whether America “will go the way of other non-Christian, pagan societies into the dustbin of history.”

Mefferd: This is just not a small deal, this is a massive deal and he’s put ‘America on the path to moral disintegration,’ as you put it.

Kuhner: And I think civilizational collapse.



Kuhner: The important issues facing us are really not even economic, I understand that people are worried about their jobs and the deficit, it’s really defending a culture of life and if we do not defend a culture of life, we will go the way of Ancient Greece, we will go the way of Ancient Rome, we will go the way of other non-Christian, pagan societies into the dustbin of history. I believe that gay marriage is a symptom of our moral decay and cultural decline and that’s why I think Middle America has said, enough is enough, and so you saw the people of North Carolina vote overwhelmingly, 61-39%, for Amendment One, passing a constitutional amendment defining marriage as it’s been for thousands of years as between a man and a woman. To what is to me frightening, and I don’t want to overplay this, but you almost see a political-cultural civil war brewing.

Kuhner went on to attack judges who overturned laws banning same-sex marriage as “fascists in black robes” and said the left is imposing a “soft totalitarianism.” “It’s an assault upon freedom, it’s an assault upon liberty, it’s an assault upon our democracy,” Kuhner said of the gay rights movement, “this is about defending our fundamental, basic democracy.”

Kuhner: The moment the people have spoken, you see these secular, progressive liberals go right away to the courts, and three, five or seven judges, almost fascists in black robes, are now able to overturn and thumb their nose at the will of the people. They are becoming increasingly tyrannical, they’re becoming increasingly anti-democratic, and I believe you’re now seeing a soft totalitarianism begin to emerge among the hard left.

Mefferd: Oh yeah. And one thing that comes to mind, I reported on this story several days ago on my show, we had this Employment Non-Discrimination Act that Barney Frank introduced over and over and over again that tried to get through Congress and never made it, which was to give distinction to transgender individuals that you can’t discriminate against them in jobs. They couldn’t do it through Congress, so Chai Feldblum and her friends over at the EEOC, Chai Feldblum, this very well-known lesbian and gay activist, they passed, and by fiat basically, the EEOC did it themselves. I mean, this is what we’re seeing. If they can’t get done what they want to get done the traditional way, they’ll go around it somehow.

Kuhner: You’re seeing a social revolution being imposed from above. Mefferd: Yes.

Kuhner: And this is what’s very frightening. And I believe this is why it’s an assault upon freedom, it’s an assault upon liberty, it’s an assault upon our democracy. You are now seeing judicial tyranny in our midst. And that’s why this is not just an issue of traditional morality and defending Christian civilization, this is about defending our fundamental, basic democracy. It is now under siege.

Roger Schlafly Denounces Violence Against Women Act, Dismisses Congresswoman who Sought Charges Against her Rapist

Yesterday, Eagle Forum’s Roger Schlafly, son of Eagle Forum president Phyllis Schlafly, mourned the dip in the white birth rate because of its impact on “American values.” Today, Schlafly is upset about the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act. Quoting excerpts from an Associated Press article, Schlafly mocked VAWA proponents who think the law could “protect women from marrying men who like to get drunk and crazy” and for including protections for immigrants who can provide evidence of domestic abuse, writing, “We have an immigration policy that favors liars and whiners.” Schlafly went on to chastise Rep. Gwen Moore (D-WI), who discussed her ordeal in trying to “press charges against her rapist before the law’s passage,” maintaining that she simply “did not want to answer questions about whether she seduced the man.”

What VAWA is about

AP reports:
WASHINGTON (AP) - House Republicans set up a showdown Wednesday with the Senate and President Barack Obama over legislation to protect women from domestic violence, a fight that's become as much about female voters this election year as cracking down on abuse.

...

"The man I married had a penchant for drinking and was very violent when he drank," the bill's sponsor, freshman Rep. Sandy Adams, R-Fla., said during floor debate.
Really? Is that what the law is about? Is VAWA going to somehow use federal law to protect women from marrying men who like to get drunk and crazy?
Wisconsin Democrat Gwen Moore recalled what it was like to try to press charges against her rapist in the days before the law's passage.

"I took him to court (but) indeed, I was on trial," Moore said. "I had to prove, as a victim, that I was not being fraudulent in my accusations. They brought up how I was an unwed mother with a baby. Maybe I seduced him. They talked about how I was dressed."
So she testified in court that a man raped her, but did not want to answer questions about whether she seduced the man. She wants a federal law to presume that men are guilty so that female accusers do not have to answer embarrassing questions.

Another hot VAWA issue is visas:
Ronan and his allies argue that there's what he calls a "big national fraud" in which immigrant women claim to be abuse victims in order to gain residency or citizenship through the act, which can offer women permanent residency if they testify against abusive husbands.

The Violence Against Women Act actually offers two avenues for victims of abuse to seek immigration relief. Women in the US illegally can currently seek temporary visas if they are victims of domestic violence.
More and more foreign women are getting permanent USA visas by making unverified accusations of abuse. We have an immigration policy that favors liars and whiners.

Right Wing Round-Up - 5/17/12

Right Wing Leftovers - 5/17/12

  • Now Citizens United says the fundraising letter it sent out under Mike Hucakbee's name which said President Obama has surrounded himself with "morally repugnant political whores" was just "sent out as a test to a small number of people."
  • Gary Bauer comes out against Facebook co-founder Eduardo Saverin's move to renounce his U.S. citizenship in order to avoid taxes, saying "frankly, his move really irritates me."
  • You can't say you weren't warned: "A Prophetic Warning About the 2012 Presidential Elections."
  • Obviously, this admitted mistake will in no way stop the Birthers from continually citing it as proof that President Obama was not born in Hawaii.
  • James Dobson takes to WorldNetDaily to blast Obama over his support for marriage equality: "I hope you live to regret ripping into the institution of marriage, which has been foundational to the social order of all nations."
  • Michael Youssef says Obama "is not a true Christian who believes in and obeys the authority of God's Word."
  • Finally, Professor John Fea wonders if it is "it time to gather Christian historians together to sign some kind of formal statement condemning [David] Barton's brand of propaganda and hagiography."  To which we can only say: ABSOLUTELY! 

Jackson: 'The Black Community is in an Adulterous Relationship with President Obama' Over Gay Marriage

Earlier today we posted a clip of Harry Jackson saying that, with President Obama's recent statement in support of marriage equality, "is just like during the times of Hitler" as gay activists are now "coming after one group after another group."

This afternoon, Jackson followed that up with a new statement accusing President Obama of leading the black community into "an adulterous relationship" by supporting gay marriage which is "no different than a married person having a relationship with someone other than their spouse":

Bishop Jackson also said Obama's announcement that he now supports same-sex marriage was nothing new.

"I realized Obama was for same-sex marriage from the very beginning of his political career," said Jackson. "Jeremiah Wright (Obama's former pastor) has been performing same-sex 'commitment services' for years. Obama has been exposed to this belief for years and has demonstrated time and time again that he does not believe that homosexuality is a sin. Actions speak much louder than words."

...

"The black community is in an adulterous relationship with President Obama," Jackson said. "He is asking us to stray from the most basic tenets of Scripture – that marriage is an institution made by God for man and woman to become one and procreate. He's telling us it's fine to hold onto our beliefs but that it's also okay to accept his stance on a position that goes against that core belief."

"This is no different than a married person having a relationship with someone other than their spouse," said Jackson.

Another Anti-Gay Day at Liberty Counsel

Liberty Counsel’s fixation on attacking the LGBT community was on full display today.

First, LCAction released a memo claiming that President Obama is giving gays and lesbians preferential treatment in order to bring about the “collapse of American culture,” offering examples of the administration’s support of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Hate Crimes Prevention Act, push for LGBT rights abroad, funding for HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment programs, and an order prohibiting health insurance plans from discriminating against LGBT customers, which LCAction claimed would mean that “every individual is going to pay higher health care premiums.”

On Freedom’s Call, LC chairman Mat Staver attacked President Obama for backing marriage equality, alleging that the “sexual anarchists” in the White House are pushing “social engineering on steroids,” and the debate over marriage “is not and never has been about equality:

Some speculate that Vice President Joe Biden is to blame, others point to Education Secretary Arne Duncan, still others say to follow the money trail and point to the nearly $15 million he raised within days of the announcement. Despite the reason for his evolution, what the radical sexual anarchist community in their allies in the White House are seeking to accomplish is social engineering on steroids. There is simply no basis in history, science, or higher law, to justify the redefinition of marriage. This debate is not and never has been about equality; instead it is a debate over the laws of nature and whether the government is willing to recognize them.

Staver today also blasted an ordinance in Jacksonville, Florida, that would bar “discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodations” based “on a person’s sexual orientation or sexual identity.” “Morality and privacy will be in jeopardy if this ordinance passes,” Staver warned.

The City Council of Jacksonville will vote next week on an ordinance that will add sexual orientation and gender identity to the list of other protected classes, such as race, age, and disability.

“This ‘civil rights’ ordinance takes away more rights than it supposedly grants,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel. If passed, Jacksonville will be another city whose restrooms and locker rooms will not be segregated by one’s sexual identity at birth, but rather his perceived gender. Citing a case in Orono, Maine, where a teenage boy, who self-identifies as a girl, is allowed to use the girls’ bathroom at school, he said, “Wherever this is passed, privacy and decency are eroded.”

Jacksonville’s ordinance carries an exemption for churches and religious organizations. However, religious people do not live in churches, but the community. People of faith use community day care centers and YMCA locker rooms. They participate in Boy Scouts and sporting events. “Wherever people gather, morality and privacy will be in jeopardy if this ordinance passes,” Staver said.

“This has never been about discrimination,” Staver said. “These ordinances are meant to legitimize and codify the homosexual and transgender lifestyles.”

Jesus, David Barton, and the Sixth Amendment

David Barton's insistence that various social institutions and governmental provisions have come verbatim out of the Bible has reached its logical culmination with the release of a new audio presentation entitled "God in the Constitution" in which Barton seeks to lay out the seven specific ways in which Constitution is "explicitly Christian [in] nature."

The hour-long program consisted primarily of various familiar claims Barton has made over the years, merely consolidated into one presentation.  But Barton did add a few new wrinkles, like his assertion that every one of the amendments in the Bill of Rights was rooted in the Bible, including the Sixth Amendment's provision guaranteeing the accused the right to confront their witnesses, which Barton claimed was rooted in the passage about of Jesus and the woman accused of adultery:

Now how can you say Due Process protections come out of the Bible? Due Process is the right to a trial by jury, the right to compel witnesses on your behalf, the right to confront your accuser, all these different things that we have in the 4th-8th Amendment. How in the world can that come out of the Bible? Well, the answer is real simple ... You have trials throughout the Bible. Peter was in several trials, Paul was in several trials, Jesus was in trials. Jesus was actually supposed to be judge over a trial - they brought to him the woman caught in adultery and He looked around and said "woman, where are your accusers?" In other words, what are you doing here and your accusers aren't here to make the accusation, you can't do hearsay charges.

Of course, just as he does with Matthew 20's Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard, Barton totally misrepresents the context and message of this passage, which appears in John 8: 2-11:

And early in the morning He came again into the temple, and all the people came unto Him; and He sat down and taught them.

And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto Him a woman taken in adultery. And when they had set her in the midst, they said unto Him, “Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us that such should be stoned but what sayest thou?”

This they said testing Him, that they might have cause to accuse Him. But Jesus stooped down and with His finger wrote on the ground, as though He heard them not.

So when they continued asking Him, He lifted Himself up and said unto them, “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.”

And again He stooped down and wrote on the ground.

And they who heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning with the eldest even unto the last, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing in the midst.

When Jesus had lifted Himself up and saw none but the woman, He said unto her, “Woman, where are those thine accusers? Hath no man condemned thee?”

She said, “No man, Lord.” And Jesus said unto her, “Neither do I condemn thee; go, and sin no more.”

First of all, the woman was not brought to Jesus for trial, but rather as a test to try and entrap Him.  And secondly, the reason there were no accusers left to condemn the woman was because they had all dispersed after Jesus delivered his famous "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" statement. 

The lesson of this passage is that all people are guilty of sin and in need of repentance and forgiveness ... but Barton presents it as proof that our Constitution is based specifically on the Bible.

John Derbyshire Claims 'Overwhelming Majority of Black Americans Agree' with His Column Defending White Supremacy

Former National Review columnist John Derbyshire returned to the white nationalist website VDARE, headed by his colleague Peter Brimelow, to defend his earlier VDARE column arguing that “White supremacy, in the sense of a society in which key decisions are made by white Europeans, is one of the better arrangements History has come up with.” In a post published yesterday, Derbyshire claimed that “the overwhelming majority of Black Americans agree with me” because only a small fraction of freed slaves left the U.S. to Africa after the abolition of slavery, noting that Harriet Beecher Stowe and Abraham Lincoln had at times supported efforts to resettle African Americans in Liberia:

What generated the most shrieking and swooning from the guardians of racial orthodoxy in this cycle was this remark in my VDARE.com column:

"White supremacy, in the sense of a society in which key decisions are made by white Europeans, is one of the better arrangements History has come up with."

On the John Locke principle, though—i.e. "I have always thought the actions of men the best interpreters of their thoughts"—the overwhelming majority of black Americans agree with me, and always have. From very early in the Republic, free blacks not only had the opportunity to escape from white supremacy, they were encouraged to do so by abolitionists.



But with all this opportunity and encouragement, how many freed blacks actually chose to escape from under the iron heel of white supremacy? Most sources give 15,000-20,000—out of a Civil War-era black population of around four million. That’s less than half of one percent. Ninety-nine point five something percent preferred white supremacy. That's an even bigger proportion than voted for Barack Obama in 2008.

"I have always thought the actions of men the best interpreters of their thoughts."

Apply John Locke's apothegm to the sloppy, dishonest, thuggish, anti-intellectual actions of the guardians of racial orthodoxy in today’s America, and you get a pretty good insight into their thoughts.

Testing Media Research Center Spokesman's Advice to Pastors on how to discuss Gay Rights

Media Research Center’s Tim Graham talked to Janet Mefferd yesterday where he claimed that opponents of same-sex marriage can’t get on TV, a point which he then undercut when he admitted that anti-gay activists like Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council and Harry Jackson actually made the rounds on TV to respond to President Obama’s endorsement of marriage equality. Graham called Obama’s announcement a “tragic,” “dark” and “depressing moment” for America, and declared that he “would like to see what would happen” if pastors like Jackson could speak about same-sex marriage during interviews just as “he does at his church”:

Graham: I think for a lot of people Obama saying, ‘I think this should be the way it is in America,’ was really a tragic moment for the country, it was a very dark moment, a very depressing moment. Those people, like me, who have that opinion, try getting on television!

Mefferd: That’s what I was going to ask you, as you were surveying the landscape of the media over the weekend and since the President made this stand on his new evolution, which was really an old evolution that he brought out again, did you see many conservatives or many people who were in favor only of traditional marriage getting a say so on TV?

Graham: A little bit, I mean the most prominent one of course has been Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, and he has made the rounds a bit, I think some of the best things he said is again, in a political context they’re not really having a moral discussion, the media wants to discuss this in political terms. I think the hard thing for people to do, I saw Bishop Harry Jackson on News Hour on PBS, he doesn’t really do in the studio what he does at his church. He doesn’t reach for the Bible, he doesn’t make a testimony, I think people get intimidated saying ‘I’m here in this secular place and I’m going to say secular things.’ I just wonder, I would like to see what would happen, if you try to engage these people, because you have to explain this is where the opposition comes, it’s from a religious, traditional point of view.

Graham may be on to something, as TV interviews might be much more candid and exhilarating if Harry Jackson told the hosts at PBS or MSNBC that demonic forces, specifically the Queen of Heaven, are responsible for gay rights, just as he preaches in church:

Or if Perkins went on CNN or Fox News and said gays are “held captive by The Enemy”:

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious