All

Anti-LGBT Activist Attacks Angelina Jolie And Brad Pitt's Parenting

Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality is furious that Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt have supported their firstborn’s desire to be called John, claiming their decision is the latest in a string of “destructive ideas” from the LGBT rights movement that “are ruining people’s lives.”

LaBarbera told conservative talk show host Janet Mefferd earlier this week that it’s LGBT rights advocates, not the Religious Right, who should apologize to gay and transgender people.

“Now we learn that Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt’s beautiful daughter, Shiloh, wants to be called John and be a boy, and they’re apparently going to accommodate this,” LaBarbera said, adding:

Then we learn that Bruce Jenner, the Olympic decathlete, this stud athlete, looks like he’s transitioning to become a woman. In other words, ideas have consequences. We’re all sick of this all-gay, all-the-time promotion, and now this transgender confusion revolution. We’re all sick of it but it has consequences. I actually witnessed a 20-something girl who wanted to be a man who had her healthy breasts removed by a surgeon, I’ve seen that in person. These destructive ideas are ruining people’s lives and yet all we hear is constantly this guilt being foisted on us by the homosexual and the transgender lobby. We’re the ones who are supposed to feel guilty. Why don’t they feel guilty when a young healthy female has her healthy breasts removed to become so-called a trans man? I don’t see the homosexual lobby and the transgender lobby apologizing for that incredibly disgusting and dangerous thing. It’s just a sad, tragic thing happening to these young people.

LaBarbera also likened being transgender to believing you are a car: “Just because somebody believes they are something doesn’t make that who they think they are. That’s just bizarre thinking. I think I’m a car, I think I’m a woman, I can become a woman. This is anti-reason thinking.”

Mike Huckabee & Jim Bakker: Christians Are Second Class Citizens In America

Yesterday, Jim Bakker posted the second part of his recent interview with Mike Huckabee, who stopped by the disgraced televangelist’s show to promote his book “God, Guns, Grits and Gravy.” Huckabee agreed with Bakker’s assessment that “Christians have become second-class citizens in our nation,” which led him to rant about the so-called War on Christmas and the Hobby Lobby case.

“Now it seems like we will protect the rights of almost any religion except Christians,” Huckabee said.

So fearful of anti-Christian persecution is Bakker that he said he was “afraid” that “the government will come for us” because he criticizes Obamacare on television.

Huckabee and Bakker repeatedly accused the government of forcing Hobby Lobby to cover “abortifacients” in its health insurance plans, with Huckabee arguing that the Affordable Care Act’s contraception coverage requirements jeopardize freedom and liberty.

This is indisputably untrue, as abortifacients are excluded from the contraception mandate. As Mother Jones explained last year, the morning-after pill, which is not an abortifacient, was actually covered in Hobby Lobby’s insurance plans “until the mandate became a political issue.”

The magazine reported that at the time it filed its lawsuit against the contraception coverage mandate, Hobby Lobby’s “employee retirement plan held more than $73 million in mutual funds with investments in companies that produce emergency contraceptive pills, intrauterine devices, and drugs commonly used in abortions.”

Mike Huckabee Plans To Run For President To Fight The Secular Theocracy

Mike Huckabee was the guest again this morning on James Robison's "Life Today" television program, where he declared that he is thinking about running for president in order to fight what Robison called the "secular theocracy" that is destroying Christian liberty in America.

"We've divorced ourselves from an understanding that we cannot survive as a republic if we do not become once again a God-centered nation that understands that our laws do not come from man, they come from God," Huckabee said. "It is the natural law of God."

After insisting that he is not intending to create a theocracy, Robison piped up to declare that "we have a theocracy right now; it is a secular theocracy" and Huckabee readily agreed.

"That's it!" Huckabee said. "It is a humanistic, secular, atheistic, and even antagonistic toward Christian faith, and that's what we need to understand. Our basic fundamental rights are being robbed from us, taken from us piece by piece."

Later, Huckabee asked for the audience to pray that God's hand will be upon him as he decides whether to run for president.

"The only thing worse than not being elected president would be to be elected president without God's blessing," he said. "I can't think of a worse place in the world to be than in the Oval Office without God's hand upon you. I'd rather not get near the place."

Lindsey Graham Tells Anti-Choice Activists: Need To Find 'Way Out Of This Definitional Problem With Rape'

Sen. Lindsey Graham, chief Senate sponsor of the GOP’s effort to undermine Roe by banning abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, spoke this morning to the Family Research Council’s “ProLifeCon,” about the House GOP’s decision to cancel a vote on its version of the bill that had been planned for today. The House leadership pulled the plug on the vote in response to protests from some Republican women who objected to a provision that exempted rape survivors from the ban only if they report the rape to police. Some anti-choice groups have objected to including a rape exception in the bill at all, a last-minute addition after the bill’s previous House sponsor, Trent Franks, implied that women who are raped rarely get pregnant.

Graham acknowledged that opponents of rape exceptions are being “intellectually consistent and honest about ‘the baby is the baby’” but argued that banning rape survivors from accessing abortion is a political impossibility: “Some of us who have these exceptions do so in a democratic society believing that there are some places we will not go.”

“I’m going to need your help to find a way out of this definitional problem with rape,” he told the audience, saying that his plan was to hold a Senate vote on a Democratic bill aimed at pushing back on state-level abortion clinic “TRAP” laws in order to show that it’s Democrats who are “extreme” on abortion rights.

“The rape exception will be part of the bill…We just need to find a way definitionally to not get us in a spot where we’re debating about what a legitimate rape is, that’s not the cause that we’re in,” he said.

This post has been updated with additional details of Graham's speech. 

Minnesota Congressman Invites Right-Wing Leader To Visit Minneapolis's Non-Existent No-Go Zones

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins is pretty sure that several neighborhoods in Minneapolis, along with the entire city of Dearborn, Michigan, have become “no-go zones” where Sharia law has effectively replaced the authority of the U.S. government:

Well, now Perkins has an opportunity to see the (non-existent) no-go zones for himself.

In reaction to Perkins’ remarks, which were first reported by Right Wing Watch, Rep. Keith Ellison, a Minnesota Democrat, has invited Perkins to tour Minneapolis and meet with the Muslim residents of the city, reassuring him that the city is “completely under the jurisdiction of local, state, and federal authorities.” Ellison posted a copy of his invitation to Perkins on Twitter yesterday:

Dear Mr. Perkins:

I am writing regarding your recent comments about my hometown. As you know, I represent the 5th district, of Minnesota which includes most of Minneapolis. You recently said that you believe parts of our city are so called “no-go zones” where state and federal laws are subordinate to Sharia Law. Having lived in Minneapolis for over two decades, I can assure you this is not true. But I would like you to come see firsthand that Minneapolis is an inclusive and thriving city completely under the jurisdiction of local, state, and federal authorities. The Muslim Americans in Minneapolis help make our vibrant and diverse place to live.

If you accept my invitation it may represent an important step toward interfaith understanding. I would be glad to organize meetings with local and federal enforcement as well as community leaders.

Anti-Choice Activists Furious About GOP's Reversal On 20-Week Abortion Ban

Yesterday, Republican leaders in the House decided to pull a plan to vote on a national ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy after Republican women balked at a provision that would have exempted rape survivors only if they reported their assault to the police. The vote had been planned to coincide with the anniversary of Roe v. Wade and the anti-choice March for Life on the National Mall.

Anti-choice activists are, predictably, furious. After all, many saw the rape and incest exception as an unacceptable compromise in the first place. The bill, originally proposed by Rep. Trent Franks last year, included only an exception for abortions that could save the life of the pregnant woman. After Franks claimed in a hearing that “the incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low,” GOP leaders quietly added a rape exception to the bill and picked a Republican woman, Rep. Marsha Blackburn, to handle the vote on the House floor.

Rep. Steve King of Iowa told the National Journal yesterday that he would fix the problem by eliminating the rape exception entirely: "I would not make exceptions for rape and incest, and then the reporting requirement would not be necessary.”

After House leaders decided to pull the bill yesterday, prominent anti-choice blogger Jill Stanek and the group Students for Life announced that they were putting together a last-minute protest at the offices of two Republican women, Reps. Renee Ellmers and Jackie Walorski, who reportedly led the fight against the rape reporting provision:

Conservative pundit Erik Erickson, in a late-night blog post, attacked Ellmers for her “two-faced ploy” and shot off a series of tweets giving her the “abortion Barbie” label he had previously bestowed on Wendy Davis:

 

Russell Moore, head of the Southern Baptist Convention’s policy arm, responded with a press release saying he was “disgusted” by the House leadership’s “act of moral cowardice” and urged his supporters to call their members of Congress to protest the “breach of trust.”

“I am disgusted by this act of moral cowardice. If the House Republicans cannot pass something as basic as restricting the abortion of five-month, pain-capable unborn children, what can they get done?

“The Republicans in Congress should come and explain this atrocity to the hundreds of thousands of people gathering here in the nation’s capital to march for life. The congressional Republicans seem to think that pro-lifers will be satisfied with Ronald Reagan rhetoric and Nancy Pelosi results. They are quite wrong.”

House Republicans are now scheduled to vote on a bill Thursday that would prohibit federal funding for abortions. This scheduled vote coincides with the annual March for Life event, held in Washington, D.C., on or around the anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision legalizing abortion in the case Roe v. Wade.

Conservative columnist Ross Douthat seemed to capture the feelings of many abortion rights opponents:

 

Right Wing Round-Up - 1/21/15

Right Wing Bonus Tracks - 1/21/15

  • Glenn Beck and crew spent last night's State of the Union Address providing sarcastic commentary so that viewers "got to hear just how awful it was in real-time, as it happened." 
  • If we were petty right-wing pundits, we'd ask how Ted Cruz can ever expect to run this nation effectively as president when he can't even manage to post a simple State of the Union response? 
  • Phyllis Schlafly calls upon Congress to "enact laws denying funding and withholding jurisdiction from enforcement of any redefinition of marriage by the federal judiciary."
  • The American Family Association has now launced a companion organization to its OneMillionMoms called, appropriately enough, OneMillionDads.
  • Gov. Bobby Jindal has invited the nation's 49 other governors to join him at this weekend's prayer event.
  • Finally, Gary Cass warns that the "Spiritual State of the Nation" is dire: "A small but militant minority is hell bent on destroying all vestiges of our Christian heritage. Marxist / Secularists have prosecuted their 100 year Cultural Jihad to infiltrate the media, education and politics, especially the courts, and impose their secular fundamentalism. The election and re-election of Barack Obama is sobering proof of their formidable influence."

Sandy Rios: Obama Used Islamic Subliminal Messages In The State Of The Union

The American Family Association’s Sandy Rios enjoys promoting bizarre conspiracy theories to imply that President Obama is a secret Muslim, and today she even managed to find proof of Obama’s hidden faith in his State of the Union address.

On Rios’ radio program this morning, a listener called in to complain that Obama said he met the country’s “newest officers at West Point, Annapolis, Colorado Springs, and New London,” which the listener claimed was a lie because “Fort Collins is the Air Force Academy, not Colorado Springs.”

Actually, the caller is incorrect, as the Air Force Academy is indeed located just outside of Colorado Springs.

Rios didn’t pick up on the caller’s mistake, but she did use the opportunity to claim that Obama was spreading Muslim messages in his speech when he used the word “pillar” to describe the foundations of American leadership in the world: “The other thing he said that I caught, he has done this before, you know there are five pillars of Islam, and he used the term ‘pillars’ again in his speech last night.”

“It is just really interesting, language can actually give us some insight, choices of words,” she said.

Clearly, President Bush must also be an Islamist.

Religious Right Activist Admits That Marriage Equality Bans Are Like Anti-Miscegenation Laws

Brian Camenker of the anti-LGBT group MassResistance spoke to the American Family Association’s Sandy Rios this week about how same-sex marriage has wreaked havoc on Massachusetts since it became legal in 2004, declaring that ten years of marriage equality has been “terrible” for the Bay State.

“It is very, very scary. It has permeated the public school system, it has permeated the public health system, the legal system,” he said. “It has basically overwhelmed everything. It’s been a nightmare. It’s been very bad.”

Camenker’s remarks didn’t come as much of a surprise given that he once told The Daily Show that marriage equality would somehow contribute to homelessness, higher crime rates, and poorer air quality.

What did come as a surprise was Camenker conceding the point that bans on same-sex marriage are similar to laws banning interracial marriage ... and he did so by defending the constitutionality of anti-miscegenation laws!

On the face of it, the Fourteenth Amendment says that everybody will be treated equally, that the law will treat everyone equally. Well, the law treats everyone equally; everyone can only marry someone of the opposite sex. That’s it. There is no Fourteenth Amendment problem unless you stretch it to such ridiculous lengths and twist it around to claim there is. But yes, every person can only marry someone of the opposite sex. Now someone may say that it was the same issue with the miscegenation laws. And that’s true. The miscegenation laws were not a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment because they applied to everybody. As an aside, I was living in the South at the time when the miscegenation laws were struck down and the interesting thing about that was, nobody paid any attention to it, nobody cared, it was like page 25 in the newspaper, there weren’t these signature drives or meetings and gatherings. Nobody really cared at all. Here it is a much different thing because it really is a moral issue.

The Supreme Court in Loving v. Virginia struck down anti-miscegenation laws on the basis that they violated the Fourteenth Amendment. It was indeed a “moral issue” at the time, as many religious conservatives frequently alleged that interracial marriages were contrary to biblical teachings and natural law.

Some Americans, disproportionately white, still oppose interracial relationships today.

Equally preposterous is Camenker’s claim that “nobody cared” about the Loving decision. Many states have attempted to keep their anti-miscegenation laws on the books, and interracial couples have faced a long history of violence and discrimination.

At least Camenker, unlike other Religious Right activists, is being consistent in his opposition to the reasoning behind the Loving ruling and court decisions in favor of marriage equality for same-sex couples.