February 2012

Right Wing Leftovers - 2/28/12

  • Republican Senator Olympia Snowe has announced that she will not be seeking re-election.
  • Rick Santorum now regrets saying that John F. Kennedy's speech about the separation of church and state made him want to "throw up."
  • Dinosaurs were totally mentioned in the Bible.
  • Bryan Fischer is happy to welcome Andy McCarthy to the "no Muslim immigration" club.
  • Rick Joyner says that "as a longtime, faithful Republican, I have never been more ashamed of my party than I have watching the nominating process this year."
  • Finally, based on this report, it doesn't appear as if United In Purpose's effort to register millions of new Christian voters has gotten off to a very good start.

Janet Parshall Hosts Self-Described 'Ex-Gay' to Discuss how Homosexuality 'Tragically Develops'

Yesterday on In the Market, Religious Right talk show host Janet Parshall hosted “ex-gay” activist Stephen Bennett to describe his “battle with same-sex attraction – and the power that set him free.” During the program Parshall and Bennett took calls from people with strained relationships with their openly gay sons and daughters, advising one woman not to attend her lesbian daughter’s commitment ceremony, and Bennett told listeners that “complete change is completely possible for those who seek it.”

He claimed that child molestation is the leading factor for how homosexuality “develops,” even saying that “almost every out lesbian that we see in Hollywood has declared either in a book or in an interview that they were molested early on in their childhood.” Bennett went on to claim that along with abuse, adoption is responsible for homosexuality. Of course, what was not mentioned in the program was that the country’s chief medical and psychiatric organizations all oppose “ex-gay” therapy as dangerous and ineffective.

I believe that homosexuality is completely developmental, it tragically develops early on in most cases in one’s childhood due to so many different things, there is not a cookie cutter answer or reason why. Many times it could have to do with a parent, the same-sex parent, it could involve molestation, almost every out lesbian that we see in Hollywood has declared either in a book or in an interview that they were molested early on in their childhood. That’s not everyone’s story but if we really look and see that there are root causes and root issues underlying a person’s homosexuality, and I always say that homosexuality, anyone’s homosexuality, is an outward expression of an inward conflict. I firmly believe based upon the word of God that complete change, not partial change, complete change is completely possible for those who seek it.



There’s many, many deep issues, again mentioning the idea of adoption as well as some abuse that was there before. A lot of statistics that are out show that there’s a high number of men and women involved in homosexuality and they share with the adoption issue and, again, molestation. Of course, doesn’t mean that anyone who was adopted is going to be gay.

Gaffney Likens his Critics to the Ku Klux Klan

Frank Gaffney today in the Washington Times had strong words for his detractors, claiming that anyone who points out his malicious anti-Muslim bigotry is just like a member of the Ku Klux Klan. Progressives and Muslim-Americans aren’t the only ones who have documented Gaffney’s consistent attacks on Muslims, as even the American Conservative Union passed a resolution denouncing Gaffney and prominent conservative attorney Cleta Mitchell found in an investigation that not only does Gaffney routinely make completely baseless allegations about two of his rivals in the ACU, Suhail Kahn and Grover Norquist, but also that his “hatred” of Norquist is “fueled by the fact that Grover is married to a Muslim-American woman.”

Today Gaffney writes that the supposed encroachment of Sharia law in US courts has placed us in “the civil rights struggle of our time,” and says that anyone who opposes him are similar to the “Ku Klux Klan’s members” who “reviled an earlier generation of civil rights activists”:

In short, we find ourselves in what is, properly understood, the civil rights struggle of our time. Those who stand up for freedom against Shariah are quite literally protecting the rights of women, children, people of faith and other minorities sure to be abused by its misogynistic, intolerant and domineering doctrine. That means protecting, as well, Muslim-Americans who have come to this country to escape the long arm of Shariah law. In due course, though, Shariah’s repressive strictures would not simply be a threat to these communities. They would be a toxic blight upon all of us.

Ironically, today, it is defenders of our freedoms who are being denounced as “racists,” “bigots” and “Islamophobes.” Such terms are, in truth, being used in much the same way and for precisely the same purpose as the Ku Klux Klan’s members reviled an earlier generation of civil rights activists for loving blacks: to defame, threaten and isolate their opponents. We cannot, and certainly must not, tolerate the Islamists’ intolerance.

Muslims are, of course, free to practice their faith in America like anyone else - provided they do so in a tolerant, peaceable and law-abiding way. What they are not entitled to do, in the name of religious practice, is subvert our Constitution, deny us our rights or engage in sedition without facing concerted opposition - if not prosecution.

Today, every bit as much as in the civil rights struggles of the past, there are those who are prepared to go along with what they know is wrong in order to get along. Now, as then, the few who recognize that any such accommodation makes more certain the ultimate triumph of evil, may be vilified and even harmed. But now, as then, more and more Americans are emerging who see the danger posed by our time’s totalitarian threat - Shariah - and will do their part to secure freedom against it, both here and, as necessary for that purpose, elsewhere.

FRC’s Religious Freedom Expert would Force Raped Woman to Give Birth to Rapist’s Child

The Family Research Council bragged earlier this week that Jeanne Monahan, the head of its Center for Human Dignity, would be testifying today before Congress on how mandatory contraceptive coverage is an affront to Americans’ religious freedom.

However, FRC and allies like the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, have an odd of understanding of freedom. It’s really just the freedom for everyone to live according to their religion, and only a very narrow interpretation at that. Monahan, who holds a master’s degree in theology of marriage and family from the Pope John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family, is no exception.
 
In a blog post from January entitled “A Pro-Life Hero: Minka Disbrow,” Monahan wrote the following (emphasis mine): 
In 1928, as a young and innocent teenager, Minka Disbrow lived in South Dakota and worked on a dairy farm. One day while enjoying a picnic, Minka and a friend were jumped by three men and raped. Innocent to the degree that she didn’t comprehend how babies were created, months later the 17-year-old Minka was confused and surprised to find her body changing and growing. Her parents soon found an adoption agency. […]
 
In a similar story, Ryan Bomberger, of the Radiance Foundation was conceived in an act rape. Like Minka, Ryan’s mother chose to carry her child to term. Ryan now dedicates his life to promoting and protecting the dignity of every person. For a recent lecture by Ryan on the hope and joy of adoption click here.
 
All can agree that rape is a horrific act of violence that no one should ever undergo. But abortion after a rape robs an innocent victim of a very beautiful life.
While it’s incredible that Monahan would suggest that Minka Disbrow “chose to carry her child to term,” given the description she provided, the bigger issue is that she would force a woman to give birth to her rapist’s child.
 
In a column from last November, Monahan spoke out against providing the full range of medical care to female victims of human trafficking. Her overriding concern was that women who had become pregnant after being raped might choose abortion (emphasis mine):
Evidence exists that shows women who seek an abortion after rape add to their suffering: they now struggle with the coupled pain of the rape and the abortion; the abortion can become what some have termed “a second rape.”
 
Additionally, a recent peer-reviewed meta-analysis published in the British Journal of Psychiatry revealed that women who choose abortion have a significant increase in mental health problems including depression, anxiety and suicidal behaviors. A situation where a woman is trafficked and becomes pregnant is extremely difficult, but such women deserve loving and honest care and attention, and abortion is not part of that.
Monahan’s writing makes it plainly clear that she is far less concerned about helping women and defending human dignity than she is with forcing all of us – women in particular – to live by the narrow religious views of herself and her employer. That’s what they really mean when they talk about religious freedom.
 
UPDATE: Here's a recent video of Monahan, who is testifying now, on her views on reproductive rights:
 

FRC’s Religious Freedom Expert would Force Raped Woman to Give Birth to Rapist’s Child

The Family Research Council bragged earlier this week that Jeanne Monahan, the head of its Center for Human Dignity, would be testifying today before Congress on how mandatory contraceptive coverage is an affront to Americans’ religious freedom.

However, FRC and allies like the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, have an odd of understanding of freedom. It’s really just the freedom for everyone to live according to their religion, and only a very narrow interpretation at that. Monahan, who holds a master’s degree in theology of marriage and family from the Pope John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family, is no exception.
 
In a blog post from January entitled “A Pro-Life Hero: Minka Disbrow,” Monahan wrote the following (emphasis mine): 
In 1928, as a young and innocent teenager, Minka Disbrow lived in South Dakota and worked on a dairy farm. One day while enjoying a picnic, Minka and a friend were jumped by three men and raped. Innocent to the degree that she didn’t comprehend how babies were created, months later the 17-year-old Minka was confused and surprised to find her body changing and growing. Her parents soon found an adoption agency. […]
 
In a similar story, Ryan Bomberger, of the Radiance Foundation was conceived in an act rape. Like Minka, Ryan’s mother chose to carry her child to term. Ryan now dedicates his life to promoting and protecting the dignity of every person. For a recent lecture by Ryan on the hope and joy of adoption click here.
 
All can agree that rape is a horrific act of violence that no one should ever undergo. But abortion after a rape robs an innocent victim of a very beautiful life.
While it’s incredible that Monahan would suggest that Minka Disbrow “chose to carry her child to term,” given the description she provided, the bigger issue is that she would force a woman to give birth to her rapist’s child.
 
In a column from last November, Monahan spoke out against providing the full range of medical care to female victims of human trafficking. Her overriding concern was that women who had become pregnant after being raped might choose abortion (emphasis mine):
Evidence exists that shows women who seek an abortion after rape add to their suffering: they now struggle with the coupled pain of the rape and the abortion; the abortion can become what some have termed “a second rape.”
 
Additionally, a recent peer-reviewed meta-analysis published in the British Journal of Psychiatry revealed that women who choose abortion have a significant increase in mental health problems including depression, anxiety and suicidal behaviors. A situation where a woman is trafficked and becomes pregnant is extremely difficult, but such women deserve loving and honest care and attention, and abortion is not part of that.
Monahan’s writing makes it plainly clear that she is far less concerned about helping women and defending human dignity than she is with forcing all of us – women in particular – to live by the narrow religious views of herself and her employer. That’s what they really mean when they talk about religious freedom.
 
UPDATE: Here's a recent video of Monahan, who is testifying now, on her views on reproductive rights:
 

Boykin: 'Islam is Evil'

Yesterday on Prophetic Perspectives with Rick Joyner, Jerry Boykin sat down with self-proclaimed ex-terrorist Kamal Saleem. We have reported on Saleem’s ridiculously implausible story before, as he claims to be a descendent of the Grand Wazir of Islam, a title that does not exist, and claims to have worked for the secular Palestine Liberation Organization, the Islamist group Hamas, Moammar Qaddafi’s government in Libya, and Al Qaeda in Tora Bora, all until he came to the United States to wage “culture jihad.” Even though Saleem’s story has been thoroughly and routinely debunked, he is still a prominent speaker in Religious Right circles and is an ally of Boykin, a former lieutenant general turned anti-Muslim activist.

On the show, Saleem and Boykin profusely expressed their love for Muslims, but warned that their religion is “evil.” Saleem said that “we’re anti-Islam itself, it’s coming to destroy humanity.” Boykin went on to claim that “Islam is evil, Islam is an evil concept” and said that “we need to reach out to the Muslim people and bring them the light of the Gospel, and we also need to be very clear that Islam in a pure sense, in an authoritative sense, is evil.”

Watch:

Franks: Obama Assaults Catholics While Apologizing to Muslims

Last week, President Obama issued an apology after NATO mistakenly burned copies of the Quran, which not only set off riots in Afghanistan while the apology predictably outraged Republicans here at home.

Today, Rep. Trent Franks joined Tony Perkins and Tim Wildmon on the "Today's Issues" radio program, where all three voiced their disgust with President Obama, whom they accused of undermining the troops while appeasing the enemy.

Franks was so incensed that he even managed to compare Obama's apology for this incident to his push for contraception coverage in health insurance, saying Obama has no problem about blatantly insulting and assaulting Catholics while groveling before Muslim.  Franks then went on to warn Catholics that if Obama is willing to "crush under foot their religious freedom in an election year, God help us when he gets re-elected ... because you ain't seen nothing yet":

Robertson says Obama's 'Role in Life is to Diminish the Power of the United States'

Televangelist Pat Robertson on the 700 Club today slammed the Obama administration’s plan to scale back Defense Department spending as a ploy to “diminish us,” even though commentators believe the department avoided deep cuts and note that significant savings resulted from withdrawing troops from Iraq. Robertson maintained that the President “is suspect” because “he has made clear that his role in life is to diminish the power of the United States, he really just wants to diminish us.” He claimed that Obama “has an agenda” that is not “in keeping with the long rage goals of the United States of America.”

Watch:

I don’t trust the motives of the President because he has made clear that his role in life is to diminish the power of the United States, he really just wants to diminish us, he wants to cut our nuclear arsenal dramatically, he wants to cut this, that and the other. If we had trusted his motives we’d say, “OK well maybe we can talk about it,” but I think I and many other Americans distrust him because he’s made clear in some of his writings and other things that he thinks the imperialist nations need to be restrained, need to be downgraded, that the great imperialist powers should no longer be allowed to roam freely on the globe. Furthermore, he does not believe in American exceptionalism. So we’ve got a President who is suspect. So when he comes out with these massive cuts, you say, ‘are you really doing something to the budget or are you really trying to just diminish us’?



That’s the problem we are dealing with here ladies and gentlemen is that we’ve got a man in charge of this country who has an agenda, and we question is that agenda in keeping with the long range goals of the United States of America? And I question it.

AFA: Vote to end ‘Evil’ Obama’s ‘all-out war on Christians’

It’s not exactly a surprise when the American Family Association, home of the consistently unhinged Bryan Fischer, uses over-the-top rhetoric in its attacks on President Obama.  Still, the latest fundraising letter from AFA President Tim Wildmon is memorably apocalyptic in tone:

In a very real way the year 2012 is as important to our nation as was the year 1776.

Just as then, this year Americans must choose between freedom and tyranny.

Wildmon goes on to call the administration’s recent regulations on insurance coverage of contraception “but the latest instance of the Obama Administration’s all-out war on Christians.”

Wildmon cites "the choice God put before the Israelites before He would allow them to enter into the Promised Land" and says

I believe God is asking America to make that same choice now:

              Life and good … or death and evil.

Wildmon suggests Obama’s re-election would bring God’s wrath on America:

 …everyone here at AFA is convinced that the elections this November will determine whether or not America will survive as a nation. After all, God has been long-suffering with us for decades now. How long will his patience last?

But, he says, if tens of millions of Christians register and vote for men and women who “respect our Christian heritage, will fight to protect religious freedom, and will work to build America’s crumbing moral foundation,” then

We can literally save America! As a nation we can stand before Almighty God and tell Him:

We love You, Lord! As a people, we will walk in Your ways and keep Your commandments!

The response card accompanying the letter seeks donation to “help elect godly leaders and to restore America to a nation that honors the one, true God.”

Tony Perkins' Definition of Hate: Not Giving $ to FRC

The latest direct mail letter from the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins is an extended attack on the Commitment Campaign, a project launched last November by Third Way to bring a bipartisan message focused on committed couples to the hearts-and-minds campaign for marriage equality.  Perkins suggests that not giving money to FRC, a Southern Poverty Law Center-designated hate group, is “a form of hate.”

FRC’s fundraising campaign against “fake marriage” includes a video that recycles lies about the impact of marriage equality – that schools will be forced to teach kids how to have gay sex, that pastors will be silenced, etc. – and also includes a twist on the now-standard Religious Right claim that anti-gay efforts are not about hate, but love for those “trapped in homosexuality.”

“Silence about the documented harm this lifestyle does is not loving,” says Perkins, “Such silence is, in fact, a form of hate.” 

“So,” writes Perkins, “I’m asking you to say ‘No’ to silence [i.e. hate] and ‘Yes’ to speaking the truth in love at a decisive moment in America’s history…a moment when faith family and freedom are at stake.” 

What he wants is a "generous financial gift."  You wouldn't want to be a hater, would you?