All

Rep. Jeff Landry Baselessly Claims the Obama Administration offers Muslim Airline Passengers 'Waivers' to bypass TSA Screenings

Today on Jay Sekulow Live, Rep. Jeff Landry (R-LA) discussed with the American Center for Law and Justice’s Chief Counsel an amicus brief that the ACLJ is putting together on behalf of the congressman in the lawsuit against the Obama administration’s mandate for health insurance plans to include contraception coverage. Landry maintained that the Obama administration is showing its “hypocrisy” by mandating that religiously-affiliated hospitals and universities cover contraception in their health insurance plans while also “granting special status or waivers to Muslims as they go through TSA screenings.”

The congressman’s allegation that the Obama administration is giving Muslim passengers “special rights as they go through the TSA screening” doesn’t seem to have any basis in reality, as the TSA on its website gives no mention of religious exemptions and TSA administrator John Pistole testified that anyone who wants to avoid a pat down based on religious reasons is “not going to get on an airplane.”

Sekulow: How big of a deal, how big of an issue is this both in the body politics [sic] and among your constituents?

Landry: Down here in south Louisiana this is huge, this is very important to my constituency. I think the biggest problems that a lot of Americans are having out there is the hypocrisy of this administration. Remember, this is an administration who has no problem granting special status or waivers to Muslims as they go through TSA screenings. Look, as they believe that there is a need to grant them special rights as they go through the TSA screening based upon their religion, that’s fine, I’m ok with that. But then don’t turn around and attack Christians when they stand up and say ‘listen, we believe that the policies you’re putting in place violate our religious freedoms as well.

Landry warned that if the contraception mandate, which he called a “dangerous” exercise of power, is upheld then there will be “no limit to what the federal government can do”:

This strikes at the very foundation of freedom of religion and freedom of conscience, if we allow the federal government to violate this principle there is no limit to what the federal government can do thereafter.



To me this is one of the biggest cases brought forth in the country in a long, long time. I got to tell you, my hat’s off to the Catholic bishops around America, they have gotten to the point where they understand that this exercise that is going on with the federal government is a dangerous one. If they allow this to happen, if we allow this to happen as Americans, as Catholics, as Christians, there is no limit to where the government goes from here. You know, Jay, to me that is the biggest danger, that should be the biggest concern, I mean where does it stop after this?

Rep. Trent Franks says Abortion Rights Supporters are on the 'Wrong Side' of 'History and Eternity'

Last week, Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) appeared on Jay Sekulow Live to voice support for his PRENDA bill, which would ban abortion on the basis of gender. Franks admitted that the legislation was essentially a ruse to push the criminalization of all abortions, and while PRENDA received a majority of votes it failed to pass because it needed a two-thirds majority to pass under the suspension of the rules. Franks intends to bring the bill up again for a vote.

On Thursday, Franks told American Center for Law and Justice executive director Jordan Sekulow, who was sitting in for his father, that opponent of his bill will be “on the wrong side of justice and the wrong side of humanity, both in history and eternity.” Back in 2009, Franks dubbed President Obama an “enemy of humanity” due to his support of abortion rights.

Sekulow: People are calling this show, congressman, and saying ‘why is this so controversial? How is this even having to be debated?” But we’re one of those countries, congressman, that has no laws on this whatsoever.

Franks: That’s true. There’s a lot of reason why this gives the left indigestion. It shouldn’t. They should just say, ‘you know what this is a good bill and we’re going to vote for it because if we don’t we’re going to find ourselves on the wrong side of justice and the wrong side of humanity, both in history and eternity.’ You know this is a serious, serious issue.

Perkins: Americans Will Never Accept Gay Marriage Because it 'Violates Reason and Natural Law'

Recently, Tony Perkins and Harry Jackson sat down for a half-hour interview with CBN's David Brody to discuss President Obama's support for marriage equality and what it will mean for the 2012 election.

Brody has posted the entire interview on his blog, in which Perkins compared the issue of gay marriage to the issue of abortion, declaring that Americans will never accept the legitimacy of gay marriage, regardless of what the courts rule, because "same-sex marriage violates reason and natural law" and warning that any Supreme Court ruling upholding the legality of gay marriage will "create great unrest in this society": 

For his part, Jackson saw the President's statement as an opportunity to create a new "Black-Brown coalition" among African Americans and Hispanics rooted in opposition to the Democratic Party's growing support for gay rights and fueled by resentment against gay activists who are trying to push minorities to the back of the line. 

Jackson said comparisons between the push for gay rights and the struggle for civil rights are nonsense because systematic discrimination and violence against the gay community "never happened" and warned that if African Americans and Hispanics don't escape the "Democratic Party plantation," then "America's best days are over": 

MassResistance Grieves Advances in Same-Sex Marriage 'Madness' and 'Lunacy'

More and more activists on the far right have blamed the recent political and legal victories of gay rights advocates on what they perceive as reluctance among conservatives to attack gays and lesbians more directly and aggressively. In response to a recent court ruling that struck down a section of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) as unconstitutional, MassResistance said that supporters of the law must do more to challenge DOMA opponents’ underlying claims that gays and lesbians are “simply a minority group whose rights are illegally being denied by the federal government.”

“As long as homosexual behavior is not presented as abnormal, medically dangerous, and morally repugnant,” the group writes, “we will continue to lose.” MassResistance lamented the use of “cowardly” legal arguments that stress the importance of opposite-sex relationships instead of explicitly attacking homosexuality, concluding, “any legal argument on homosexual ‘marriage’ is bordering on madness, because the concept itself is sheer lunacy. We need to start saying that.”

The decision thus asserts that homosexuality and same-sex "marriage" are legitimate and unassailable from a moral or other standpoint. And from that assertion, homosexual "marriage" and heterosexual marriage are morally and legally interchangeable. And homosexuals are simply a minority group whose rights are illegally being denied by the federal government. This is all the homosexual groups needed to move forward.

The homosexual movement knows it cannot accomplish its goals through the ballot box (they've lost 32 state elections in a row). They've had some success through massive lobbying of state legislatures. But their most direct way is through corrupt courts. Taking down the DOMA law is key to forcing the imposition of "gay marriage" throughout America despite the votes in those 32 states. But it's still a considerable legal challenge to do it all at once. So by successfully attacking this narrow part of the DOMA law -- federal benefits and income tax filing status -- the homosexual movement opens the door to sebsequently [sic] dismantling all the rest of it.



As long as homosexual behavior is not presented as abnormal, medically dangerous, and morally repugnant we will continue to lose. If other side is allowed to portray homosexuality as normal and natural (but something conservatives simply are "bigoted" about) in their legal arguments, they will always eventually prevail. We cannot concede those points and instead attempt to argue on the basis of "legal" reasoning, the historical "purpose" of marriage, or weak-kneed arguments such as "every child needs a mother and father." But unfortunately that is exactly what too many pro-family lawyers and pro-family spokesmen do. It's the "respectable" path. But it's cowardly, ineffective, and the road to hell (so to speak).



The next step is the US Supreme Court. Will they agree with this? We certainly hope not, but it's frighteningly possible.

Our side has a terribly bad record of winning these kinds of court cases -- for the reasons stated above. In the grand scheme of things, any legal argument on homosexual "marriage" is bordering on madness, because the concept itself is sheer lunacy. We need to start saying that. As George Orwell once said, "We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men." Let's hope that the House of Representatives' legal team can find it in themselves to do the right thing.

AFA's Wilson Warns Marriage Equality Will Make America Disappear: 'This is a Nation-Killing Issue'

After arguing that legalizing same-sex marriage will lead to man-dog and man-car marriage, the American Family Association’s Buster Wilson last week on Today’s Issues alleged that the U.S. may disappear if the country approves marriage equality for gays and lesbians. Wilson stated that “nations in history’s past” that allowed same-sex marriage “no longer exist.” “It is a nation-killing issue,” Wilson stated.

Wilson:  I want to tell you something. We got thirty two or thirty three states when given the opportunity for the people to vote on whether or not to make a constitutional amendment in their state saying that marriage is between one man and one woman, all of the states that have voted on it have voted for it, we’ve got thirty two or thirty three of them now that have voted that way.  What does that tell you?  I believe by and large Americans are of the mindset that if I can try and capture the secular mind of the American public it might be something like this: I don’t care what you do in the privacy of your bedroom, I don’t care who you love or don’t love, but I don’t want to take something that’s s bedrock as marriage for over 5,000 years and put in law that it’s changed.  That’s scary, and it’s wrong. And if you like looking at history at all, it is very easy to see the nations in history’s past that have done that kind of thing no longer exist.  It is a nation-killing issue.

Rick Joyner Warns of Looming Race Riots

On Friday's installment of "Prophetic Perspective on Current Events," Rick Joyner warned that "we are close to having race riots in America" and that the racial tensions created by the Trayvon Martin shooting are giving "the enemy" an opportunity to unleash massive death and destruction in this country.

Explaining that racism "empowers the spirit of death," Joyner pointed to Nazism and Japanese atrocities during World War II as proof of what can happen and warned that, if it takes hold in America, "there will be a whole lot more death and a whole lot more destruction than the last time": 

Steve Pidgeon warns that Marriage Equality will make America a 'Cursed Society'

Today on Family Talk, James Dobson spoke to Republican activist Attorney General candidate Steve Pidgeon about an upcoming vote in Washington state that anti-gay groups hope will repeal the state’s law legalizing same-sex marriage. Pidgeon, a birther conspiracy theorist who has likened same-sex marriage to demon worship, is behind Initiative 1192 [pdf], which “reaffirms the definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman.” Along with I-1192, conservatives are also pushing Referendum 74 that would ask voters to approve or reject the marriage equality law signed in February.

He told Dobson that judges in America are creating “a form of totalitarianism” that “violates the fundamental freedoms of what it means to be an American” in order to “impose” same-sex marriage. However, Washington’s marriage equality law was passed by the state legislature and signed by the governor.

Pidgeon also described same-sex marriage as a “profanity” and an act of “desecrating the temple,” warning that people “must rise up” so America does not become “a cursed society”:

What you have, Dr. Dobson, is you have the oligarchy impressing its will upon the people. This is a form of tyranny, if you will, that even Thomas Jefferson warned us about, saying that when the court imposes its will on the public it’s an oligarchy, it’s a form of totalitarianism, where a few select people believe that their will should be imposed on the rest of us. It’s unconstitutional and more importantly it violates the fundamental freedoms of what it means to be an American to have a couple of select judges tell an entire state, ‘you can’t determine for yourself whether or not you’re going to be righteous in the sight of God or not.’



You know, this business of same-sex marriage is really not about same-sex marriage, Dr. Dobson, I mean it is about desecrating the temple.



You cannot be silent any more, there is a time when you cannot allow such a profanity to walk into the sacred assembly and now is that time.



Now is the time, this is the hour, people are being called, you must rise up and you must speak on behalf of the kingdom. This is the difference between whether or not we will be a blessed society or a cursed society, and it’s not just for you, it’s for your children and your grandchildren. You must stand and speak now.

Richard Land Ends Radio Show in wake of Trayvon Martin Rant, Plagiarism Charges

Southern Baptist Convention’s chief “ethicist” Richard Land signed off from his weekly radio broadcast on Saturday without mentioning why he was leaving the show. He simply stated that his program is ending “due to a variety of circumstances” and asked people to pray for a “spiritual reformation” in America. Land lost his show due to his racially-insensitive tirade about the Trayvon Martin shooting, which he vowed to never apologize for until he eventually did, and for plagiarizing commentaries on his show, including part of his remarks about the Martin.

While the SBC trustees reviewing Land’s radio show said that plagiarism was one of the “practices that occur in the radio industry,” even Religious Right talk show host Steve Deace said in an interview with The Tennessean that plagiarism is not common practice on radio shows, contradicting the trustees’ claims:

Trustees claim that Land was following practices that are common in the talk radio industry.

But Steve Deace, a syndicated Christian radio host from Des Moines, Iowa, said that’s not the case.

He said that radio hosts sometimes hear other people’s turns of phrases and repeat them when talking about issues. But they don’t read word for word from other people’s work.

If a host does that, then listeners will eventually catch them at it.

“They are going to know if you are lifting stuff from people,” he said.

Blogger Aaron Weaver, who first caught instances of Land’s plagiarism, pointed out that Land not only didn’t cite the authors of the articles but was actually “adding extra comments and using different adjectives” to pass commentaries off as his own. Indeed, when he initially defended his racially-charged rant regarding the Trayvon Martin shooting, Land never mentioned in his non-apology that he was reading from a Kuhner column.

Weaver and Robert Parham of the Baptist Center for Ethics think the SBC’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, which Land leads, should have been tougher on Land, especially considering the fact that Land teaches at a university where students who commit plagiarism can be expelled:

Weaver, a graduate student at Baylor University who blogs at thebigdaddyweave.com, said that trustees were wrong when they said the plagiarism was a result of “carelessness and poor judgment.”

“He wasn’t being careless,” he said. “This was intentional.”



Robert Parham of the Nashville-based Baptist Center for Ethics said that Land’s radio show should have been canceled years ago. He said that the show was more about politics than about religion or ethics.

Allowing Land to keep his job, despite the plagiarism, sends the wrong message, said Parham.

Along with being the head of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, Land also teaches regularly at Baptist seminaries.

“Allowing Land to continue as an SBC official — without even an unpaid leave of absence — will create a banquet of distasteful consequences for the Southern Baptists when it comes to how seminaries deal with students who plagiarize papers and how churches deal with pastors who plagiarize sermons.”

Fischer: 'It is Altogether Right to Discriminate Against Homosexual Behavior'

On Friday, Brian wrote a post taking note of a recent column by Bryan Fischer in which he called on conservatives to "reclaim the ‘D’ word" and begin to boldly defend the practice of discriminating against gays and lesbians.

As Fischer normally does whenever he posts a new piece, he ended up discussing it later that day during his radio program where he made the case that "it is altogether right to discriminate against homosexual behavior" because homosexuality is not something that should be accepted by "any rational society":

Right Wing Round-Up - 6/1/12