Brian Tashman's blog

Last week Mario Diaz, Concerned Women for America’s Policy Director for Legal Issues, appeared on Crosstalk with Jim Schneider on Voice of Christian Youth America radio to warn about the supposed devastation that would result of Congress repealing the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Diaz, who wrote a Washington Times op-ed lashing out at Senate Democrats who support the law’s repeal for working “against the will of the people” in order to “force their own values on the rest of the nation,” told Schneider that legalizing marriage for same-sex couples is like redefining the color blue. He went on to say that even advocates of gay rights intuitively believe that marriage equality is wrong, arguing that gay rights contradicts the Bible and the views of the Founding Fathers:

Schneider: It even revolts me to even say ‘same-sex marriage,’ because that term in itself is an oxymoron. Marriage is between one man and one woman, and when you put ‘same-sex’ before it, it’s two terms that do not go along with each other.

Diaz: That’s exactly right, I always say it is like redefining a color, it’s like getting the color blue and saying for now on some other color will be called blue. You’re really redefining the term to mean whatever you want it.

…

The Bible is clear and God’s principle is clear, and I think those are those self-evident truths that our Founders referred to, and I think we all know in the end, even those who are supporting this behavior, know that there is something wrong about this. They feel, even those people who are listening to us now, they don’t know exactly how to express it but they know that this is wrong. That is something we can go with but we need to be diligent in standing up for those truths and not buying into this whole idea of ‘tolerance’ as we have talked about it, have unfortunately shamed us, and even made some Christians who know the truth to be silent in order not to be called bigoted or any other name. We need to stand up for those truths because they are important and foundational for our future.

CWA’s South Dakota director Linda Schauer also spoke out against the repeal of the discriminatory law, contending that the repeal of DOMA was part of a plot by liberals to wreak “havoc on our traditional values”:

DOMA prevents states from being forced to recognize same-sex “marriages” from other states and defines marriage as the union between one man and one woman for federal purposes.

The (Dis)Respect for Marriage Act circumvents the will of the 31 states (including South Dakota) that have already voted to protect marriage as the union between one man and one woman in their state constitutions.

Liberals are persistent in wreaking havoc on our traditional values. No surprise if Sen. Harry Reid attaches it to a must-pass defense bill putting senators between a rock and a hard place. Hopefully, Johnson will respect the South Dakota Constitution and affirm his 1996 vote for DOMA by opposing the so-called Respect for Marriage Act. I trust his thoughts on the definition of marriage have not eroded.

When not panicking about the demise of DOMA, the anti-gay group was criticizing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s appointment of openly gay actress Ellen DeGeneres to be the United States’ envoy for AIDS awareness. Janice Shaw Crouse, the director of CWA’s Beverly LaHaye Institute, told OneNewsNow that her appointment shows that the Obama Administration is trying to use the AIDS crisis “to promote the homosexual agenda”:

"She is openly lesbian and obviously is an activist on the issue of homosexual rights and has taken a very active role in pushing the homosexual agenda. So for her to be the person who's out front and the face of the Obama administration in the whole fight against AIDS I think is inappropriate," Crouse decides.

She is also concerned about how the appointee will be received in sub-Saharan Africa, where AIDS has been rampant. "There are plenty of Christian nations in that region and some Muslim nations in that region, so she is not going to receive a very warm welcome there or be an appropriate person to be the face of the fight against AIDS," the CWA spokesperson warns.

So Crouse concludes the administration's choice appears to be "an effort to promote the homosexual agenda."

WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah today declared that it’s “time to dump Grover Norquist” and kick him out of the conservative movement, adding his name to other right-wing activists like Frank Gaffney, Pamela Geller, Don Feder, Tom McClusky and Erick Erickson who want to give Norquist the boot. Farah said that Norquist’s “decision to bless GOProud,” the gay conservative group which has Norquist on its Advisory Council, shows that he is “unashamedly pro-perversion.” In addition, Farah said that Norquist, who helped found the Islamic Free Market Institute, is “shockingly pro-Islamist and has used his well-developed connections in Washington to spread the tentacles of stealthy jihad through the corridors of power, including the White House.”

Farah ended his column by calling on the American Conservative Union and the National Rifle Association to force Norquist off their boards and to “dump him as the economic guru of the conservative movement and Republican Party”:

I say this not only because of his decidedly Shariah-friendly activities and associations.

I say it not only because of his decision to bless GOProud, a faux conservative group promoting the homosexual agenda to Republicans.

I also say it because Norquist represents all that is wrong with the so-called "economic conservatives" in our midst – a group that turns out to be not so conservative on economics once you scratch beneath the surface of what they are saying and doing.

…

Grover Norquist is not a conservative true believer. He may have been at one time. But he is no longer – that's for certain. Maybe, like other politicians, he's just been around Washington too long. Here's the scorecard you should consider:

• He's shockingly pro-Islamist and has used his well-developed connections in Washington to spread the tentacles of stealthy jihad through the corridors of power, including the White House.

• He's is unashamedly pro-perversion, given his position on the advisory board of GOProud.

• And he is a phony economic conservative who helped mislead tea-party Republicans in control of the House of Representatives this year giving Obama all the money he needed to keep destroying the free-enterprise system through the end of his term.

What am I missing here?

It's time to dump Grover Norquist – dump him from the ACU board, dump him from the NRA board and dump him as the economic guru of the conservative movement and Republican Party.

• Amy Sullivan @ TIME Swampland: Why the Religious Right Can’t Seem to Get the Candidate It Wants.

• Leah Nelson @ Hatewatch: Pastor with a Past to Host Anti-Islam Conference.

• Warren Throckmorton @ Religion Dispatches: Participant Discredits the Original Ex-Gay Study.

• Jamelle Bouie @ The American Prospect: Not All Flip-Flops Are Created Equal.

• Casey Schoeneberger @ Bold Faith Type: Poll of the Week: 2011 American Values Survey.

• Richard Cizik, past vice president of the National Association of Evangelicals, takes the Religious Right to task for advancing “a political agenda by suggesting that the priorities of corporations and the GOP fit snugly with the teachings of Jesus.”

• Brent Bozell of the Media Research Center is still enraged about Glee.

• Pat Buchanan says addressing concerns about income inequality will ultimately lead to violent communist revolutions.

• Personhood USA now has Wisconsin in its sights after a bruising defeat in Mississippi.

• Quote of the day from Alan Keyes: “as the Mississippi vote attests, our greatest national sin is the failure of the professed proponents of our founding ideals to stand firmly in battle against the assault on God and right carried out by those like Obama right here at home.”

While Religious Right leaders lauded tea party groups for taking to the streets, now they are asking for the government, and God, to crush the Occupy Wall Street movement.

Earlier this week, the Family Research Council asked members to pray against “these raucus [sic] groups” and “ideological anarchists,” asking for God to “harvest souls for Christ among them”:

The expanded Wall Street Occupation is endorsed by labor unions, liberal mayors, governors, the White House, the American Nazi and Communist parties, ACORN, Hollywood enertainers [sic] and a long list of supra-liberal and liberal groups, not the least of which is the liberal media. Encampments in major cities, including Washington, DC, are not only a nuisance, a health hazard and an embarrassment [sic] to thinking Americans, they are increasingly becoming violent. Ideological anarchists intimidate and abuse bystanders, damage automobiles, jump on and in front of moving vehicles, urinate and defacate [sic] on private and public property, go naked and perform sex acts in public, produce tons of garbage that taxpayers have to collect and haul away, etc. Yet the mainstream press, which villainized [sic] the Tea Party movement, after long ignoring it, flagrantly idealizes the Occupiers and ignores the damage and ugly crimes happening in most places where an occupation is in progress. Fortunately the movement is "losing its bloom," and beginning to die out. The honeymoon among these diverse activists may be coming to an end.

May the movement simply fizzle. May God protect those who live nearby and must encounter these raucus [sic] groups. May God harvest souls for Christ from among them just as He did discontented youth in the Jesus Movment [sic] of the 60's and 70's (1 Sam 22:1-2; 2 Chr 15:4-7; Ps 18:40-50; Is 42:14-18; Lk 19:39-40; Rom 8:15-16; 10:20).

Writing for Rick Joyner’s Oak Initiative, Lloyd Phillips asserted yesterday that Occupy Wall Street is about to become violent and referred to the economic justice movement as the “FLEA Party,” or, “For Lawlessness en’ Anarchy”:

While the “Occupy” group is not even a large group at this time, it is interesting— in a historical context—that they call themselves the 99%. This is the same tactic that was used by Vladimir Lenin in the Russian Revolution when he called his movement the “Bolsheviks,” which means “the majority.” His revolution was successful in a similar violent fashion as the French Revolution. I find it interesting that just as the TEA Party demonstrations call upon the ideals of the American Revolution, many “Occupy” protestors continually refer to the French Revolution. Numerous calls for violence have been published from various “Occupy” locations and thousands of arrests have been made across the country. In NYC alone, violent crime, including the murder rate, has soared during the time of the protesting (although this is not being widely covered by the media outlets). In a widely distributed speech, one protestor openly called for violence as with the French Revolution and called Mahatma Gandhi “a tumor” because he preached non-violent civil disobedience, which the speaker said created a nation full of poor people where wealth is distributed unevenly. This of course ignores the fact that India actually has the largest middle class of any nation on earth, and it is rapidly expanding.

It is interesting to make note of some of the groups and nations that have endorsed the “Occupy” protests: Iran and Communist China, the Communist party of the USA, the Nazi party of the USA, David Duke the KKK leader, George Soros, SEIU, CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations), Key Democratic leaders, and our President, to name a few. If one can tell anything from the friends one keeps perhaps this should tell us something important about the “Occupy” protests. Because of the look and dress of many of the “Occupy” protestors, some people have taken to calling them the Flea Party. The acronym for FLEA is “For Lawlessness en’ Anarchy.”

Not to be outdone, Cindy Jacobs prophesied today that God will contend with an emerging and dangerous “spirit of anarchy,” which she has previously said controls the Occupy Wall Street Movement:

For the Lord says the United States is fast approaching her "tipping point". I am ready, says God, to reach out and balance but even if tremendous prayer is poured out, it will only steady the nation for a season unless there is a heart-felt turning back to the Lord.

…

There are hidden plots being hatched on many levels that need to be uncovered. Plots of anarchy on various levels from minor to large. The Spirit of Anarchy will try and manifest to hold captive and terrorize the cities and this must be turned in prayer. Terrorists are moving behind the scenes to hit more than one target out a time to strike terror into the hearts of people.

However, one will put a thousand to flight and two, ten thousand! I will expose and uncover those who plot together with unlikely partnerships if my people pray! There are some nations who are saying they are at peace with the United States but it is only a ploy. Intercede for exposure of these alliances.

Pamela Geller continues to take pride in her ignorance in her blog post on The Call: Detroit. While interfaith leaders are protesting Lou Engle’s prayer rally, which starts tonight at Ford Field, the anti-Muslim activist seems to have no knowledge of Engle’s vicious anti-Muslim views at all.

Geller said:

Once again Hamas-tied CAIR is victimizing non-Muslims, calling a Christian prayer event in Michigan a threat to Muslims. As if Christians would attack Muslims ....... and while praying, no less. There is a psychological term for that. It is called projection.

Hamas-tied CAIR is warning mosques in Dearborn to "step up security" in advance of a Christian prayer summit. Only in bizarroworld, where the majority of mosque incidents are committed by Muslims.

Even though there have been multiple attacks and planned attacks on mosques in America, Geller says Muslims are living in “bizarroworld.”

While Geller lashes out at Muslims, remember that Engle and other organizers of The Call, who believe that Muslims are under the control of demons and should not have First Amendment rights or houses of worship in America:

Geller likes to refer to herself as a “human rights activist,” but is standing shoulder to shoulder with Engle, who is not only an anti-Muslim hatemonger but also brought his The Call rally to Uganda to demonize gays and rally support for legislation that would criminalize homosexuality and give homosexuals the death penalty in some cases. Clearly, Geller doesn’t have a problem with people who promote draconian, oppressive laws as long as they aren’t Muslim.

Rick Joyner of MorningStar Ministries and the Oak Initiative has regularly provided his “prophetic” analysis of the Republican presidential nomination race, and claimed to have met with at least one candidate, Michele Bachmann. But today, Joyner focused on the accusations against Herman Cain that have drawn immense media scrutiny not only into Cain’s background but also his campaign management skills, as he and his chief of staff have since blamed everyone from Rick Perry to the “Democrat machine” and even a reporter who they falsely accused of working for Politico and being the son of one of his accusers.

But Joyner is rallying to Cain’s defense in a “special bulletin” he sent to members today. The “prophet” portrayed Cain as the victim, not the two women who received settlements from the National Restaurant Association or the two other women who said Cain had harassed them.

Joyner argued that if Cain was harassing women, how come no one “has come forth admitting to having an affair with him”? Speaking about Sharon Bialek, Joyner said that “the attack she claimed happened in a car would have been impressive even for someone with the dexterity of Spiderman”:

One of the accusers, who we now know has a history of filing complaints like this and seeking compensation, did not file a complaint when she supposedly was harassed by Cain. Why? This has to raise even more questions about her credibility.

Then the attack she claimed happened in a car would have been impressive even for someone with the dexterity of Spiderman. This accuser, who claimed she had nothing to gain from making this accusation, then happily began making the rounds of the morning talk shows.

Another missing ingredient to these charges against Cain is that no one has come forth admitting to having an affair with him. Another is that when someone is as aggressive as these accusers claim that Cain was with them, there is almost always a pattern of behavior that has grown over time, and there are usually many people who know about it. People who worked with Cain for many years have to date said this was not something they had ever witnessed in him.

But Joyner’s logic continues to amaze as he compares Cain to Jesus and says that Satan, referring to him as the “father of lies” and “the accuser of the brethren” (John 8:44; Revelation 12:10), is behind the allegations against him:

Even if the accusers all prove to be liars and deceivers, this does not prove that something did not happen. Doubts have been raised about Herman Cain’s character that will taint him with many for the rest of his life. I am not asserting innocence or guilt, but the same thing happened to Jesus, who was the Truth. He was not accused of sexual harassment, but of sexual misconduct, and many other terrible things by His enemies. These charges continue to be made about Jesus as the novel, The Da Vinci Code, recently rekindled.

My point is that you can be the most pure, perfectly righteous person to ever walk the earth, be falsely accused of heinous behavior, and many, if not most, people will believe it. The “father of lies” is called “the accuser of the brethren” for a reason. For thousands of years, he has been doing much of his evil with accusations. He has destroyed the reputations, and sometimes the lives, of many very good people, and some of the world’s best people.

But maybe Joyner’s steadfast defense of Cain will make more sense as Joyner reveals that he too has been the victim of false accusations:

I may err on the side of being too prone not to believe accusations because I also have been subject to so many false ones. The few times I’ve had the nerve to look up my name on the Internet, it’s hard to believe what people say I’ve taught or believed. Some of the good things people say about me are not true either. What is really scary is the number of people who recount my visits to their church when I know full well I’ve never been their church or even the city it’s in.

After Rick Perry jumped into the presidential race, the Texas governor quickly took the lead among Republican voters nationwide and in surveys in critical states like Iowa and South Carolina. Analysts reasonably predicted that the nomination would come down to a choice between Perry and Mitt Romney as other candidates like Michele Bachmann fizzled and Tim Pawlenty dropped out. Perry, who announced his candidacy following his The Response prayer rally, courted and won plaudits from Religious Right luminaries including James Dobson, Tony Perkins, Richard Land, David Barton, Don Wildmon, David Lane, James Leninger and Jerry Falwell Jr.

However, a number of disastrous debate appearances, including a painful fifty-three second brain freeze, have derailed Perry’s candidacy as Herman Cain has risen in the polls. But Cain’s nonsensical and inconsistent responses to standard questions on abortion rights and marriage equality, along with his dysfunctional and mismanaged campaign, did little to endear him tp Religious Right leaders.

New polls now have Newt Gingrich surging to second place behind Romney nationally, and second to Cain in Iowa and South Carolina. Rick Perry’s support in Iowa and South Carolina, on the other hand, dropped to four and six percent, respectively.

During Gingrich’s calamitous rollout, Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association outlined why “social conservatives and all those in the pro-family movement must have grave reservations about his candidacy”:

But actions have consequences, and his pattern of infidelity is only made worse by the fact that he divorced diseased wives to whom he had pledged himself "in sickness and in health...til death do us part."

John the Baptist famously rebuked a politician of his day for his problematic marital history, and Mr. Gingrich rightly comes in for similar censure.

Even Gingrich’s answer to Fischer, who asked Gingrich how he would “slow down the homosexual agenda,” didn’t seem to satisfy him.

But with Perry’s collapse, Bachmann and Santorum’s single digit polling and Cain’s daily gaffes, does Gingrich have a chance at becoming Romney’s chief opponent and the Religious Right’s candidate by default? He has certainly tried to endear himself to social conservatives by participating in the “One Nation Under God” event and pastor policy briefings, and pledging to wage an all-out war on the judiciary, a favorite Religious Right punching bag. Gingrich has wooed activists and groups like John Hagee, Joseph Farah, Janet Porter, Liberty University, Liberty Counsel, The Family Leader and the Minnesota Family Council, and helped funnel money to the American Family Association’s campaign to defeat Iowa Supreme Court justices who favored marriage equality.

The Washington Times today trumpeted the new conventional wisdom that Gingrich is a top contender, emphasizing his potential to gain support among social conservative voters who are cold to Romney. The Times quotes California pastor Jim Garlow, who reporter Ralph Hallow accurately notes is “credited with organizing the evangelicals in the drive to pass a same-sex marriage ban in California,” to show Gingrich’s support in the Religious Right.

What the Times reporter does not mention is the fact that Garlow is a top spiritual adviser to Newt Gingrich and heads Gingrich’s Renewing American Leadership (ReAL). Garlow tells the Times that conservative evangelical voters are far more forgiving of Gingrich’s serial adultery and multiple divorces than of Romney’s Mormon faith and flip flops:

Contrary to the beliefs of many in the party, voters on the Christian right have not written off Mr. Gingrich despite a personal history that includes multiple marriages and admitted infidelities.

“Evangelicals will definitely go for Newt if he is the nominee,” insisted Jim Garlow, credited with organizing the evangelicals in the drive to pass a same-sex marriage ban in California. “I used to hear them say, ‘He’s the smartest one in the room, but he has personal issues.’ I’ve seen an enormous shift in the past four or five months. They no longer talk about personal issues, but about intelligence and capability of being president.”

Mr. Garlow, senior pastor of the Skyline Wesleyan Church in San Diego, said if the nomination fight came down to Mr. Romney and Mr. Gingrich, “I’m guessing 80 [percent] to 90 percent of the evangelical vote in America would go to Newt. Romney’s Mormonism may be a factor, but the reason I hear most is they don’t trust Romney on abortion, marriage, economics and health care.”

“I think, no question, evangelicals will go for Newt if it comes down to him and Romney,” said Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition Director Steve Scheffler, credited with organizing support for Pat Robertson’s stunning second-place finish in the 1988 Iowa caucuses. “Evangelicals are concerned with personal conduct, but most will judge people on their present conduct, and they have concluded Newt’s present lifestyle is exemplary.”

Now that Gingrich is rising in the polls, will the Religious Right have to embrace him to stop Romney?

Yesterday, the Respect for Marriage Act, legislation that will repeal the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act, passed out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on a 10-8 vote, naturally spurring outrage among Religious Right activists. The vote was not a surprise to conservative groups, who told activists to be ready to fight the bill on the floor of the Senate.

Focus on the Family’s political arm CitizenLink blasted the “ironically labeled the ‘Respect for Marriage Act’” and the Thomas More Society warned of the “great legal problems, great confusion” and the “actual human beings who will be hurt” if DOMA is no more.

Family Research Council president Tony Perkins told activists that if the Respect for Marriage Act passes, “your tax dollars go to pay for the federal benefits and subsidies of gay couples” because liberals wanted to “award” marriage “to a small, vocal and already well off special interest group” and consequently cause “harm to society”:

Today the Senate Judiciary Committee passed S.598, Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s (D-CA) bill that would completely eradicate the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and the protections it affords taxpayers and the majority of state’s voters who have decided to define marriage as between one man and one woman.

The misnomer medal of the month might have to be awarded early! S.598, the misleadingly titled “Respect for Marriage Act” not only disrespects American’s across the country who want to protect traditional marriage--and have done as much in the 31 states which have passed statewide referendums in favor of marriage--it will also require your tax dollars go to pay for the federal benefits and subsidies of gay couples, irrespective of where they live, who have gotten “married” in 6 states that allow it.

Marriage is not some prize that liberals can award to a small, vocal and already well off special interest group. Marriage between one man and one woman was created prior to the formation of any governments and is given benefits by governments because it uniquely contributes to a productive society. Trying to change the definition to fit some misguided concept can only cause harm to society.

Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum lamented that if DOMA is repealed, states that don’t legalize same-sex marriage will be “forced to recognize and subsidize another state’s objectionable definition of marriage,” urging activists to make sure the Respect for Marriage Act isn’t another “item from the radical liberal wish list” that is attached to the National Defense Authorization Act:

As you might have heard, the liberal Senate Judiciary Committee passed a bill shamefully misnamed the "Respect for Marriage Act" (H.R. 1116, S. 598), which would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), today by a straight party line vote. All 10 Democrats voted Yes and all 8 Republicans voted No.

…

Now that six states have legalized same-sex marriage, in many cases by judicial or legislative fiat, overriding the express will of the people of those states, DOMA is more essential than ever to ensure that states choosing to protect traditional marriage are not forced to recognize and subsidize another state’s objectionable definition of marriage.

…

We are hearing some reports from Capitol Hill that liberals in the Senate are considering introducing the bill as an amendment to the Department of Defense (DOD) Authorization Bill.

As outrageous as this sounds, it is becoming a liberal tradition. This would be the third consecutive year that the liberal Senate has attached an item from the radical liberal wish list to this bill that is so important to our nation's defense, knowing that our legislators respect our military and don’t like to oppose defense-related authorization bills. Last year, they attempted to attach a repeal of the 1993 law prohibiting homosexuals from openly serving in the military, and the year before that, liberals attached a federal “hate crimes” bill to the DOD Authorization Bill.

William B. May of Catholics for the Common Good said that repealing DOMA will ultimately harm children:

It was disgusting to see adults trivialize marriage by bickering about benefits for gay couples while the rights and interests of children in the marriage of their mothers and fathers were being thrown under the bus.

Children have a right to know and be cared for by their mothers and fathers, and government has an obligation to promote the recognition of that right by encouraging men and women to marry before having children. But "marriage equality" says it should be discriminatory to promote marriage between a man and a woman as having any unique value or benefit for children and society. That is a lie.

Today, Senator Feinstein and the other 9 Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee made a statement that the government has no interest in the only institution that not only unites a man and a woman with each other, but with any children born from their union.

…

But that can't happen unless we are willing to make sacrifices, change our personal priorities, and roll up our sleeves to build the army needed to take back marriage and family. This is not like any other army because this is an army of love, walking with Christ, in solidarity with the increasing number of children who are deprived of marriage mothers and fathers, and young people who are receiving a corrupted understanding of love and sexuality. This undermines their ability to form healthy stable relationships that lead to marriage as the foundation of the family. This is a crisis that is effecting almost every family.

Anti-choice activists have for years equated legal abortion in America to the Holocaust, along with slavery, Jim Crow laws and terrorism. The Holocaust comparison is front and center in the new movie 180, a “documentary” that attempts to change the minds of pro-choice viewers by showing graphic footage from the Holocaust and comparing it to abortion. 180 has been publicized by groups such as Concerned Women for America and Personhood USA, which claimed to have sent the film to 600,000 Mississippi residents just days before the unsuccessful “personhood” referendum.

The producers of 180 say that “between 180,000 and 200,000 copies of the 33-minute DVD were given out at 100 of America's top universities” and that they now want high schools to use the film while teaching students about the Holocaust.

Yesterday, the Anti-Defamation League called 180 “one of the most offensive and outrageous abuses of the memory of the Holocaust we have seen in years”:

"The film is a perverse attempt to make a case against abortion in America through the cynical abuse of the memory of those killed in the Holocaust," said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director and a Holocaust survivor. "Not only does the film try to assert a moral equivalency between the Holocaust and abortion, but it also brings Jews and Jewish history into the discussion and then calls on its viewers to repent and accept Jesus as their savior. It is, quite frankly, one of the most offensive and outrageous abuses of the memory of the Holocaust we have seen in years."

…

"The creators of the film clearly don't get it," said Mr. Foxman. "No Christian who understands Jewish suffering should resort to inappropriate comparisons to the Holocaust to send a message that abortion is wrong. This was one of the most painful chapters in human history. Must the memory of the 6 million and millions of other victims be continually misused and abused by those with another agenda?"

In the film, Comfort manipulates the young people interviewed to view the killing of innocent Jews during the Holocaust to be the same as the killing of fetuses. First, he asks the young people whether they would agree to bulldoze innocent Jews into a mass grave and bury them alive it would save their own lives. Then he asks questions about abortion. He tells the young people who answered 'no' to the first question that they have just said that they would not kill innocent Jews, but they think it is okay to kill innocent babies.

Ray Comfort, the creator of 180, hit back at the ADL in a statement today, arguing that the group should be “thanking” him, adding that doctors charging for abortions are just like Nazis profiting off the killing of Jews:

"ADL should be thanking me. Instead they have come out swinging" Comfort said. "My only explanation is that they haven't thought it out before they rushed to judgment. If anyone should stand up for those who have no voice for themselves, it should be the Jews."

…

The Los Angeles-based film maker added, "Germany lawfully slaughtered six million Jews. America has lawfully slaughtered nearly ten times that amount. Also, every time Hitler killed a Jewish family he lined his pockets by seizing their assents -- their paintings, jewelry, cars, homes, and bank account. He also seized the gold from their teeth and the hair from their heads, and it amounted to billions of dollars, financing a third of his war-machine with the blood of the Jews." Comfort maintained that the American abortion industry does the same. He said, "Every time a doctor rips the arms, the legs and the head off a baby, he makes quick and easy money. If you want your 16-week baby killed in the womb, it will cost you $765 (current pricing). But if your baby is 19 weeks, it jumps to $2,165, amounting to billions in the pockets of abortion providers. American abortion is not about 'choice,' it's about money... just like the Holocaust. The analogy is legitimate."