Family Research Council

FRC: Conservatives and Gays "Cannot Coexist"

In today's Washington Update, the Family Research Council says that letter GOProud participate in CPAC is like Coke letting Pepsi share its commercials and boldly declares that "conservatives and homosexual activists cannot coexist in a movement predicated on social values":

[W]e continue to believe in the founding principles behind CPAC--even if some of its organizers seem to have forgotten ... FRC has chosen not to partner with a "conservative" event that places the protection of marriage on the same plane as redefining it. Would CPAC team up with the Brady Campaign which fights to restrict--if not abolish--the Second Amendment? Would it collaborate with groups who promote doubling capital gains taxes? Regardless of what CPAC organizers may believe, conservatives and homosexual activists cannot coexist in a movement predicated on social values. This has nothing to do with whether individual homosexuals should be allowed to attend CPAC, or whether they are capable of holding conservative positions on some issues. We recognize that some organizations represented at CPAC are silent on the issue of homosexuality. But organizations whose whole reason for existence is to promote the forced public affirmation of homosexual conduct should not be welcomed at CPAC, because that is not-by any stretch of the imagination-a "conservative" agenda. By allying itself with liberal social organizations, ACU is abandoning at least a third of the conservative movement.

Our participation in CPAC--or lack of it--has absolutely no bearing on our ability to love and dialogue with people who disagree with us. As I've said before, we'll debate the other side on issues like marriage anytime--anywhere. But the suggestion that conservatives should debate marriage on our own turf is demeaning and downright deceptive. This is a fundamental principle that shouldn't be up for debate in any conservative gathering. If the policy is not up for discussion, why foster the impression? If it is, then make that clear upfront. This is a matter of basic integrity. Other coalition members, who question the wisdom of our stand, should realize that this is a fight for more than social values. If marriage is fair game at CPAC, which issues are not? Limited government? National security? Social, economic, and defense conservatism form an integrated and indivisible whole.

Reaching out to new allies is a worthy goal, but not at the cost of driving a deep wedge in the movement that was unified to bring change to Washington this fall. Some of our friends have criticized FRC's decision by drawing the scriptural parallel of Jesus eating with sinners. But this isn't Jesus eating with sinners--it's Jesus partnering with them to open a restaurant!

FRC Seeks Supernatural Intervention To Reverse America's Embrace of "Perverted Sexual Practices"

The Family Research Council's most recent prayer team update declares that America is under God's judgment because of its embrace of "perverted sexual practices" and urges members to ask God to "supernaturally intervene" to reverse steps toward gay equality:

America's moral decline is directly related to His people's public and private acts of disobedience that dishonor God and His eternal laws. Scripture warns that the shedding of innocent blood (e.g., abortion) and perverted sexual practices are abominations that call for Biblical judgment. America is now under such judgment. Can we find our way back? God has only one prescription.

...

With the traditional American family in near statistical free fall, homosexual activists persist in their destructive agenda. Backslapping and self congratulation at President Obama's signing of the law to overturn DADT left Biblically informed onlookers aghast. Obama and Vice President Biden say they are rethinking their position on homosexual "marriage." Yet God's plan for marriage, family, and natural sexuality is essential to the survival of our nation. Dr. Pat Fagan's groundbreaking research not only shows that God's way works best, but it also shows the precipitous decline of the America family (thus its ability to support the nation) as nearing the point of no return.

The Senate not only used the lame duck session to overturn Don't Ask, Don't Tell (65-31 vote), it also confirmed Chai Feldblum by "unanimous consent" to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission during Christmas week. Feldblum, an open lesbian, is infamous for her view that homosexual rights trump religious liberty.

Meanwhile attacks charging FRC and other Christian groups with "hate" for holding to a Biblical view of marriage and sexuality, continues.

  • May God's people have faith to believe that laws giving those who practice homosexuality special rights, protections and privileges can be reversed! May the Lord supernaturally intervene to do so.

More Religious Right Seminars for Elected Leaders

Looks like members of Congress and legislators in Arkansas might not be the only elected officials David Barton will be teaching in the coming weeks, as Andy Birkey of the Minnesota Independent reports that he has also been invited to participate in a joint Minnesota Family Council/Family Research Council summit for Minnesota legislators: 

When state legislators checked their office mailboxes Wednesday, they found an invitation to attend a Minnesota Family and Marriage Summit featuring a group that the Southern Poverty Law Center identifies as a hate group. The summit, to be held next week, is organized by the Minnesota Family Council and the Family Research Council and will teach legislators how to pass a constitutional amendment banning rights for same-sex couples.

The summit includes courses for legislators such as “Bullying bills: The homosexual agenda in your child’s public school” and “Why family matters,” but the bulk of the summit appears to be focused on getting an amendment on the ballot in 2012 banning gay marriage.

Sessions entitled “Effective marriage protection amendment strategies” and “What’s the harm in same-sex marriage?” are aimed at getting the amendment passed, and the latter is taught by a man who once said gays should be “exported” and that homosexuality should be outlawed: Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council.

...

Invited, but not confirmed, is David Barton of Wallbuilders.

FRC: Mt. Soledad Cross Ruling Just Like Taliban Blowing Up Buddahs

Yesterday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Mount Soledad memorial cross was an unconstitutional government endorsement of religion ... and the Family Research Council has responded by comparing the ruling to the Taliban blowing up statutes of Buddah: 

"In 2001, when militants set out to bomb two colossal Buddhist statues that had stood untouched in Afghanistan for more than a thousand years, the global community rightly condemned the actions as religious barbarism. Like the statues, the Mt. Soledad Cross is a monument to America 's cultural history, a symbol of our Christian heritage and a tribute to brave Americans who laid down their lives in our nation's cause. Their memories should not be besmirched.

Vander Plaats Launches New Bus Tour to Remove Entire Iowa Supreme Court

After Bob Vander Plaats succeeded in ousting three Iowa Supreme Court justices through retention votes following the Court’s unanimous decision in favor of legalizing gay marriage, he pledged to drive out the remaining four judges if they did not resign. He has now announced a bus tour throughout Iowa’s 99 counties to push for the removal of the other members of the Court over their 2009 ruling.

Vander Plaats, the head of The Family Leader, has emerged as the state’s most influential Religious Right activist despite losing the 2010 Republican primary for governor. His effort to remove the three Justices last election was backed by millions of dollars of spending from outside groups such as the American Family Association, the Family Research Council and the National Organization for Marriage. A former adviser recently wrote that Vander Plaats is “obsessed with the gay-marriage issue” and “so obsessed that he would rather see the Iowa judicial system destroyed, instead of pursuing a change in the law within the channels provided (a constitutional amendment).”

Lynda Waddington of The Iowa Independent reports that Matt Reisetter, the director of development for The Family Leader, will join Vander Plaats on the bus tour which will visit all of the state’s 99 counties. Waddington points out that Reisetter delivered a controversial anti-gay speech at the University of Northern Iowa deriding hate crimes laws, families with same-sex parents, “civil right status” for same-sex orientation, and that “it’s ironic that one legislative action was intended to decrease smoking to improve public health, while the other legislative inaction was (not) done in the name of ‘equality rights,’ and, at the very least, indirectly promotes unhealthiness, by putting a state-sanctioned blessing on anal sex, a behavior that disproportionately causes AIDS/HIV.”

Since Iowa hosts the first-in-the-nation presidential caucus, his clout will only grow as GOP presidential candidates seek Vander Plaats’s support as he solidifies his position at the top of Iowa’s social conservative movement.

Religious Right Tells GOP Not To Ignore Social Issues

Back around the election, a group of Religious Right leaders sent a letter to top Republicans urging them to cut taxes, shrink the government, build up the military and restore "traditional moral values."

Apparently concerned that the "restoring traditional moral issues" part might get left out of the mix, many of those same leader have signed on to a new letter to these same top Republicans warning them not to ignore social issues like abortion and marriage:

"When considering America's fiscal and national defense policies, which are critically important, we believe that social issues, including, but not limited to, the sanctity of human life and the preservation of marriage as the union of one man and one woman, are indispensable," the Dec. 20 letter said.

The signers said they believe focusing on all three issues is "essential for America and our future."

"A stool with only one or two legs is unstable," they said. "All three legs are necessary. We believe it is critically important that the leadership, and those appointed or elected to lead, embrace all three legs of the stool. A broad-based and sustainable movement requires all three core values."

...

The letter went to Boehner and Cantor, as well as Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl of Arizona.

In addition to [Richard] Land, other signers were Mathew Staver, chairman of Liberty Counsel; Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council; Gary Bauer, president of American Values; Samuel Rodriguez, president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference; Harry Jackson, chairman of the High Impact Leadership Coalition, and Jim Garlow, chairman of Renewing American Leadership.

Right Wing Boycott Movement Links CPAC to the Muslim Brotherhood

Incensed over the participation of the conservative gay-rights group GOProud in the Conservative Political Action Conference, or CPAC, far-right activists are now trying to connect the major conservative event to the Muslim Brotherhood. The American Conservative Union (ACU), which hosts CPAC, has been the target of Religious Right groups and leaders over their handling of GOProud’s involvement, with Joseph Farah even calling for conservatives to “purge” the ACU from the movement. Already, the Family Research Council, Concerned Women For America, American Values, the American Principles Project, the Capital Research Center, the Center for Military Readiness, Liberty Counsel, Liberty University, and the National Organization for Marriage have announced their boycott of CPAC.

Now, the conservative news site WorldNetDaily, a major cheerleader for the groups boycotting CPAC, is giving right wing activist Frank Gaffney a platform to charge the ACU with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, a radical Islamist group. Gaffney is no stranger to conspiracy theories, as he previously claimed that the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell “amounts to a vote for reinstating the draft,” maintained that Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan is tied to an “ominous campaign” to “bring Shariah to America,” and said that Barack Obama is “America’s first Muslim president.” He is joined by WorldNetDaily’s Paul Sperry, who wrote a book asserting that radical Muslims were infiltrating the government through the congressional internship program.

Gaffney outlines a theory that since the ACU is allowing the leader of an organization known as Muslims for America, a conservative group with ties to the GOP, to participate in CPAC, the ACU is supporting a “stealthy effort to bring Shariah” to America. He is also outraged that Grover Norquist, the head of the highly influential Americans for Tax Reform and a GOProud board member, is involved in CPAC as well. But mostly, Gaffney directs his vitriol at Suhail Khan, the chairman of the Conservative Inclusion Coalition. Both Khan and Norquist are ACU board members, and in 2009 Khan received the Young Conservatives Coalition’s Buckley Award at CPAC. But according to Gaffney, Khan has ties to radical Islamists and, along with Norquist, wants to promote a “seditious totalitarian political program” in the U.S.:

With the Conservative Political Action Conference under fire for allowing participation by a homosexual activist group called GOProud and for a financial scandal in which some $400,000 was misappropriated under the watch of current leadership, Frank Gaffney, a leader of the conservative movement for the last 30 years, charges that CPAC has come under the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is working to bring America under Saudi-style Shariah law.

Gaffney, deputy assistant secretary of defense under Ronald Reagan, is founder and president of the Center for Security Policy and co-author of the new book "Shariah: The Threat to America." He told WND that Islamism has infiltrated the American Conservative Union, the host of CPAC, in the person of Washington attorney and political activist Suhail Khan and a group called Muslims for America.

Khan is a member of the ACU board and, according to Muslims for America, will assist the group's presence at CPAC during the 2011 meeting Feb. 10-12.

Gaffney also accuses another ACU board member, leading conservative political organizer Grover Norquist, of helping the Muslim Brotherhood spread its influence in the nation's capital.



Paul Sperry, author of "Infiltration: How Muslim Spies and Subversives Have Penetrated Washington" and "Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America," says Khan is running "an influence operation on Capitol Hill that's quite sophisticated and slick."

"Suhail is the firstborn son of the late Mahboob Khan, a founding father of the Muslim Brotherhood movement in America," said Sperry, a Hoover Institution media fellow. "Suhail has been a consultant to CAIR [The Council on American-Islamic Relations] and served on committees at ISNA [the Islamic Society of North America], both of which the government says are fronts for Hamas and its parent the Muslim Brotherhood."



Gaffney describes Norquist, who, ironically also serves on the board of the controversial GOProud, as the enabler for Muslim Brotherhood associates, providing them with access into the highest reaches of the conservative movement and the Republican Party through his many contacts. Norquist, the founder of Americans for Tax Reform, hosts a weekly political organizing meeting attended by many of the leading conservatives in Washington.

"This is a ticking time bomb for the conservative community," said Gaffney. Using language reminiscent of the Cold War, Gaffney declared, "An influence operation is contributing materially to the defeat of our country, supporting a stealthy effort to bring Shariah here.

"Grover Norquist is credentialing the perpetrators of this Muslim Brotherood influence operation," he adds. "This is part of tradecraft, to get people who have standing in a community to give it to people who lack it, so they can do what they're assigned to do in terms of subversion. We are in a war, and he has been working with the enemy for over a decade."

Norquist declined to respond to WND requests for comment.

Said Gaffney, "What's going on in conservative circles should give everyone real cause for concern. What it bespeaks is an effort to penetrate and influence conservatives, who are the most likely and perhaps only community in America who will stand up to and ultimately help ensure the defeat of this seditious totalitarian political program."

Religious Right Preparing to Fight For Repeal of Gay Marriage in New Hampshire

While New Hampshire’s Democratic Governor John Lynch survived his reelection race despite a barrage of attack ads from anti-equality groups like the National Organization for Marriage, Republicans won veto-proof majorities in both the State House and Senate. As a result, Religious Right groups such as the Family Research Council have committed to do “whatever it takes” to repeal New Hampshire’s law legalizing gay marriage, which passed in 2009 and went into effect last year. In 2009, Religious Right groups succeeded in overturning a Maine law legalizing gay marriage that was passed by the legislature and signed by the governor by flooding the state with anti-gay activists and misleading ads, and now they have set their sights on New Hampshire. While the Republican majorities in both chambers have the votes to pass a repeal bill, it will require 2/3 majorities to override the governor’s veto. The Concord Monitor reports on how organizations are gearing-up for a major battle over the future of marriage equality in the Granite State:

The lead organizations in the fight are likely to be Cornerstone Action and New Hampshire Freedom to Marry. Cornerstone is affiliated with a national organization - CitizenLink (formerly Focus on the Family) - which could support state efforts. But both sides are also attracting attention from other groups.

On the side of repealing gay marriage, the National Organization for Marriage spent nearly $1.5 million on campaign ads against Lynch. The day after the November election, National Organization for Marriage President Brian Brown said in a press release that the organization is "poised to start taking back territory where (gay marriage) was wrongly enacted in places like New Hampshire and Iowa. That will be the next battleground, and we are confident of victory."

Brown said last week that the organization will continue to work closely with Cornerstone "to make sure that the wrong of forcing same-sex marriage on New Hampshire is corrected."

The Family Research Council also has a presence in New Hampshire, which it plans to continue. It contributed the legal maximum donation of $5,000 to Cornerstone's PAC during the elections. Tom McClusky, senior vice president of the group's policy wing, said the group has invested in making New Hampshire's Legislature more friendly to traditional marriage. "We don't want to see that go to waste," McClusky said.



How much money and effort will be poured into the New Hampshire campaign depends on what type of bill is ultimately proposed. In Maine, which held a statewide referendum that ultimately vetoed the state's gay marriage bill, local and national activists spent more than $6 million to sway public opinion.

The anti gay marriage group there, Stand for Marriage Maine, was led by a local pastor, Bob Emrich, and representatives from the Catholic Diocese in Maine and the National Organization for Marriage. It spent between $2 million and $3 million. The group hired the same public relations firm that worked on a California referendum and got help from the Family Research Council and Family Watch International. Emrich said the National Organization for Marriage was the largest financial contributor, donating around $1.5 million that helped with TV and radio ads, staff, mailings and public relations. The Family Research Council organized rallies and helped with communications and training activists.



For now, there are at least two proposed repeal bills in the Legislature and one constitutional amendment. Only the constitutional amendment has the potential to go on a statewide ballot, but not until 2012. Rep. David Bates, a Windham Republican who proposed two of the bills, said he anticipates moving forward with a repeal bill this session but perhaps not pursuing the constitutional amendment until 2012. A constitutional amendment would require a majority vote of 60 percent in the House and Senate, and a two-thirds' majority of the state's voters. The governor would not have a role.

Bates said it may not make sense to go ahead with a constitutional amendment this year, when it would not appear until 2012, and the goal of repealing gay marriage could be accomplished sooner by a law change. "This legislation is intended to restore the marriage law, to put it back where we were four years ago," Bates said.

FRC Explains Decision to Skip CPAC

The Family Research Council's Tom McClusky explains why FRC will not participate in this year's CPAC, saying they decided end the relationship years ago because they were tired of having to battle to get their issues included and that the move to allow GOProud to sponsor the event "only cemented our decision":

We left CPAC a couple of years ago (before GOProud was a twinkle in anyone’s eye) in part because we saw they were moving away from conservative principles and also because of a growing concern over the management of CPAC. We know many friends as well as former CPAC employees over the years and know how the place operates. I didn’t hear anyone here at FRC voicing surprise when a leading ACU official was caught embezzling a few weeks ago. GOProud only cemented our decision that we should continue to stay away – just as the inclusion of other non- and anti -conservative groups have done in prior years.

...

When CPAC first launched in 1973, it was a small gathering of dedicated conservatives. The conference was an example of the coalition that elected President Ronald Reagan as our 40th President. The conference embodied what is called the three-legged stool of traditional social values, economic conservatism, and a strong national defense. Traditional moral values, such as marriage between a man and a woman, are a part of longstanding, conservative philosophy. The importance of the institution of marriage between a man and a woman cannot be separated from the discussion of limited government and fiscal conservatism.

Family Research Council has had a long history with CPAC, the American Conservative Union (ACU) and the American Conservative Union Foundation (ACUF). For over a decade, FRC was a cosponsor of CPAC, sponsoring popular panels on marriage and life. Every year, (at least in the eight I have been with FRC,) we have had to push a reluctant ACU to continue these panel discussions. A few years ago, we finally opted out of the event after deciding that the annual fight over conservatism with CPAC officials was a waste of energy and time ..

McClusky also takes issue with claims that GOProud is a gay conservative group, saying that they are, in fact, "a homosexual organization that is marginally conservative":

As for the separate issue of GOProud, they are an organization that opposes basic conservative principles. It’s not a conservative organization that happens to be gay; it is a homosexual organization that is marginally conservative.

GOProud’s website explains just how radical its priorities are. This is a group that opposed the death tax and ObamaCare — not because they aren’t sound economic policies — but because they “discriminate” against “gay families.” Its platform doesn’t end there. One of the group’s top 10 “principles” is to create “enterprise zones” for homosexuals, despite the fact that the average income for gays and lesbians is higher than most everyone else. At least two more of its “principles” call for the overturning of the Defense of Marriage Act. Additional priorities include allowing homosexuals to serve openly in the military and defeating any attempt to protect one-man, one-woman marriage. The group even ran ads criticizing President Obama for not doing enough for the homosexual community.

...

[A]fter the elections GOProud further tried to divide conservatives by releasing a letter demanding that the Republican Party stay away from social issues. Ignoring their own demand, they continued pushing to overturn the law on homosexuals serving openly in the military. Hypocritical much?

You will be hard pressed to find anyone here looking to back down from a debate on the issues but it also isn’t our job to legitimize CPAC or GOProud as if they represent conservative goals and principles.

Focus on the Family Wants House Republicans to Investigate the Justice Department over DOMA Cases

Tom Minnery, Vice President of Government and Public Policy at CitizenLink (formerly Focus on the Family Action), is insisting that House Republicans investigate the Justice Department over their handling of the Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, in order to fulfill the desires of the GOP’s Religious Right supporters.

Earlier this year, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley and Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders brought two separate cases to a federal judge in Boston contesting DOMA’s constitutionality. The Justice Department defended DOMA and argued that the law is constitutional, but the Judge ruled otherwise and found that the law was unconstitutional under the equal protection clause and the Tenth Amendment.

Infuriated by the judge’s ruling, Religious Right activists were so assured of DOMA’s constitutionality that they maintained that the Justice Department must have intentionally mishandled the cases and purposefully lost. Tom McClusky of the Family Research Council said that “in part, this decision results from the deliberately weak legal defense of DOMA that was mounted on behalf of the government by the Obama administration,” and Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel and David Barton of WallBuilders recently discussed why they believe the Justice Department “threw the case.”

Today, Focus on the Family’s Tom Minnery called for social conservatives to be more demanding of congressional Republicans than they were when Republicans previously had control of Congress:

On Nov. 2, 2010, the Republicans again won control of the House, by an even larger margin than they did in 1994. It was once again a severe rebuke of the policies of the Democratic Party. We hope it won’t again cause a severe misreading of results by conservative Christians. What we learned in 1994 was that simply having power isn’t enough. What matters is what is done with that power.

Minnery goes on to say that the Religious Right should push the House Committee On Oversight and Government Reform, to be led by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), to investigate the Justice Department’s management of the DOMA case to show that the GOP is serious about opposing marriage equality:

Will there be comprehensive hearings by House oversight committees on the unwillingness of the Justice Department to thoroughly defend, as the Constitution requires, legal challenges to federal laws? I have in mind the Defense of Marriage Act. The Justice Department has failed to provide an adequate defense against lawsuits seeking to tear away this law.

He also resuscitated the false claim that the government is using taxpayer funds to subsidize abortion, asking, “Will they try hard to undo health care reform, aiming specifically at its vast expansion of government-paid abortions?”

While Issa has already said that his committee may launch inquiries into everything from climate change science to consumer protection efforts to the Justice Department’s handling of the “New Black Panther Party” case, Minnery and other Religious Right activists will work to pressure Issa to include the DOMA cases among his growing lists of investigations.

 

Farah: “Purge” the Conservative Movement of Gays and Gay-Rights Supporters

As the Religious Right’s boycott of the American Conservative Union’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) builds momentum, Joseph Farah of WorldNetDaily has called for exclusion of the ACU from the “conservative movement” as a result of their connections with GOProud, a conservative gay-rights group that is a sponsor of CPAC. Organizations including the American Principles Project, American Values, Capital Research Center, the Center for Military Readiness, Concerned Women For America, Liberty Counsel, Liberty University, the National Organization for Marriage, and the Family Research Council have decided to boycott CPAC over GOProud’s participation. GOProud wants to shrink the clout of the Religious Right in the Republican Party and referred to such groups “dinosaurs headed to political extinction.”

Farah, who previously compared GOProud to the Ku Klux Klan, joins other right wing activists in believing that GOProud is an assault on the wider conservative movement. He likens the Religious Right’s opposition to GOProud to the Biblical story of Gideon: When Giden raised up an army to free the Israelites from the Midianites and end idol-worshipping, God ultimately ordered Gideon to reduce his army from thirty-two thousand to just three hundred or otherwise “Israel would boast against me, ‘My own strength has saved me’” (Judges 7:2). Farah writes that conservatives, like Gideon, should “purge” their ranks of those who embrace “enemies of moral values” like GOProud:

If the U.S. "conservative movement" is to survive, prosper and be a force for reclaiming everything that made America unique and great in the days ahead, it is going to need a purge.

"Purge" is not a bad word. It simply means, according to the dictionary definition, "to rid of whatever is impure or undesirable; cleanse; purify."

Conservatives need to purge from their movement anything that is not conservative.

They shouldn't be attempting to broaden the definition of "conservative." They shouldn't be trying to build a bigger tent in the failed model of the Republican Party. They shouldn't be revising or lowering their standards. And they absolutely shouldn't be embracing enemies of the moral values that have defined the movement from the beginning.



That's why it's time for true conservatives to get their act together as America faces its greatest challenges ever in the next two years.

God cut Gideon's army up, slicing and dicing it until it represented only a tiny fraction of its numbers. God didn't want a big army to win victory. He wanted a miracle performed by a tiny army listening carefully and being in obedience to His commands.

God purged thousands from Gideon's army.

Conservatives need God's help, not GOProud's.

Purges can make an organization or a movement stronger.

Purges can help to refine, rather than redefine, what an ideology is all about.

Purges can sharpen and strengthen a movement – bringing it back to the core convictions and principles that made it successful.

And that's why the purge of the conservative movement should begin with David Keene and his administrative team at ACU.

FRC’s Maginnis Blasts Obama’s “Corrupt Regime,” Wants GOP to Block DADT Repeal

Bob Maginnis, the Family Research Council’s Senior Fellow for National Security, is the latest Religious Right activist to outline a strategy on how to stop the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell from coming into effect. Maginnis previously predicted that over half a million service members would quit as a result of repeal and maintained that “America is now no better than Sodom and Gomorrah.” Now, he is joining other anti-gay leaders to push House Republicans to obstruct the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Maginnis spoke to the American Family Association’s OneNewsNow, which claimed that Obama “sodomized” the military by ending Don’t Ask Don’t Tell:

Many pro-military pundits said they were sickened and angered last week when President Barack Obama ended 235 years of wholesome tradition by signing the bill that will effectively sodomize the U.S. military. One of those specialists is Lt. Col. Bob Maginnis (USA-Ret.), who was part of the military working group that helped craft the 1993 homosexual service ban that the lame-duck Congress and President Obama have now overturned.

"You have a very corrupt regime running the country," he laments. But he expects there to be a backlash when the 112th Congress replaces the lame-duck body that was repudiated by the American people last month.

"Given that [Republicans] don't have the majority in the Senate, all they can do is drastically slow down the process. And they can always withhold funding through appropriations because the House is the one that has the purse strings," Maginnis explains. "So they can make it very uncomfortable for [Democrats] to spend the money to change the personnel systems, to draft new policies [and] to put together new 'sensitivity' [training] programs."

The defense analyst adds that the new, more conservative Congress has every right to do whatever it takes to reverse what the president has done.

He is not alone in the Religious Right in calling for action to thwart the recently-signed repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell: Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy In Media suggested that the incoming House Republican majority could block the repeal, Liberty Counsel’s Mat Staver demanded that the House GOP “defund any implementation of this law” and states pass laws banning gays from serving openly in their state’s National Guard, and Joseph Farah of WorldNetDaily called for service members to leave over the policy and “let the politicians cobble together a military of social deviants if they think they can.”

Family Research Council and Concerned Women For America pull out of CPAC, Religious Right Boycott Gains Momentum

The American Conservative Union’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), one of the largest gatherings of right wing activists and a platform for Republican presidential candidates, continues to lose participants as a result of GOProud’s sponsorship of the event. GOProud is a conservative organization that supports gay rights that broke off from the Log Cabin Republicans for allegedly moving “way too far to the left.”

In November, the far-right American Principles Project instigated the CPAC boycott over GOProud’s involvement back in November, and groups such as American Values, Capital Research Center, the Center for Military Readiness, Liberty Counsel, Liberty University, and the National Organization for Marriage followed the APP’s lead in boycotting the conference.

Today, WorldNetDaily, which has provided support for the boycott movement, reports that the Family Research Council and Concerned Women For America have decided to boycott CPAC. FRC and CWA are easily the largest groups to join the boycott movement, and FRC hosts a similar conference that is geared to Religious Right activists, the Values Voter Summit. WorldNetDaily reports on their decision and the ensuing praise from anti-gay rights activists Peter LaBarbera and Mat Staver:

"We've been very involved in CPAC for over a decade and have managed a couple of popular sessions. However, we will no longer be involved with CPAC because of the organization's financial mismanagement and movement away from conservative principles," said Tom McClusky, senior vice president for FRC Action.

"CWA has decided not to participate in part because of GOProud," CWA President Penny Nance told WND.



"Excellent. It is gratifying to see FRC and CWA respond appropriately to CPAC's moral sellout of allowing GOProud as a sponsor," said Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality, the nation's best-known organization dedicated exclusively to opposing the homosexual political agenda.

"By bringing in GOProud, CPAC was effectively saying moral opposition to homosexuality is no longer welcome in the conservative movement," said LaBarbera. "Would CPAC bring in an organization specifically devoted to promoting abortion and pretend it's conservative?" LaBarbera has formerly participated in CPAC, but said he may protest the conference this year.

"Shame on CPAC for defending the absurd proposition that one can be 'conservative' while embracing moral surrender – in this case the idea espoused by GOProud of the government granting 'rights' and benefits based on sinful sexual conduct long regarded as anathema to biblical and Judeo-Christian values," LaBarbera added.

"[ACU has] gone libertarian, that's their focus," said Mat Staver, president of Liberty Counsel, a public interest law firm. "Libertarianism is right on the economy, often wrong on national defense, and doesn't care about social conservatism. Libertarians only respect one leg of the Reagan revolution, and you can't stand for long on one leg."



"We said GOProud is not a conservative organization," said Staver. "They are undermining the military" by promoting open homosexuality, and "undermining marriage" by opposing the Defense of Marriage Act, which preserves the traditional definition of marriage by limiting it to one man and one woman.

"Anything that undermines marriage also undermines our freedom and economy," said Staver. "It is contrary to our fundamental values to have as a cosponsor an organization that promotes same-sex marriage."

"GOProud doesn't fit in any of the areas of conservatism within CPAC," Staver continued. "We asked CPAC to disassociate themselves from GOProud, but they refused to.

"The only way we would return to CPAC now is if CPAC openly disassociated itself from GOProud and carried on a pattern of activity that convinces us they are truly broad-based conservatives."

The decision by Family Research Council and Concerned Women For America may spur other groups and speakers to join the boycott, although others could take the path of Ryan Sorba of Young Americans for Freedom who used his speech at CPAC to attack homosexuality and condemn GOProud’s participation:

Tea Party Leaders Preparing for Primary Fights to Bolster GOP's Ideological Purity

Back in January the Christian Science Monitor declared “Scott Brown: the tea party’s first electoral victory,” following his surprise win in the special election to fill the Senate seat of the late Ted Kennedy. But now the Boston Globe reports that conservatives and Tea Party activists are mulling over a primary challenge to the Massachusetts Republican. According to the Globe, Brown’s votes in favor of repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, ratifying the START Treaty, and reforming Wall Street (but only after it was watered down to win his support) made him toxic to many Tea Party members and other movement conservatives. The Family Research Council has pledged to back a primary challenger to any Senator who voted to repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, and the National Republican Trust PAC promised to do the same to any Republican who supported START.

More surprisingly, movement conservatives in Virginia are hoping to block George Allen from running again for the seat he lost to Jim Webb in 2006. Allen, a former Senator and Governor best known for using a racial slur against his opponent’s campaign worker, is already finding himself in trouble with Tea Party groups even though he hasn’t even announced his candidacy yet. The Washington Post reports that Allen’s voting record in the Senate may sink his chances among Virginia Tea Partiers:

For months, it appeared that former U.S. senator George Allen would have a clear path to the Republican nomination if he chose to try to reclaim his old job.

But in the summer, grumbling about his past began, culminating in a Web site outlining the reasons some fellow Republicans oppose him: He's too moderate. He's part of the establishment. He's partly to blame for the record spending and ballooning deficit in Washington.

By this month, no fewer than four Republicans billing themselves as more conservative than Allen were considering challenging him for the right to run against Sen. James Webb, if the Virginia Democrat seeks reelection.

"There are some concerns based on his record and his rhetoric," said Mark Kevin Lloyd, chairman of the Lynchburg Tea Party and vice chairman of the Virginia Tea Party Patriots Federation, a statewide umbrella group. "People are looking at things in a new light," he said.

Allen, who received a 92.3% lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union, was hardly considered a moderate in the Senate. But apparently 92% isn’t enough:

But during his one term in the U.S. Senate, some Republicans complain, he backed President George W. Bush's proposals to increase spending; supported No Child Left Behind, a costly program to create a national education report card; favored a federal program to subsidize the costs of prescription drugs for Medicare beneficiaries; and voted to expand the Hate Crimes Prevention Act to include crimes based on sexual orientation.

Jamie Ratdke, who recently stepped down as chairwoman of the Virginia Tea Party Patriots Federation in order to explore a Senate bid, said she began to consider a run for the Senate after attending a Tea Party convention that featured Rick Santorum, Lou Dobbs, and Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinnelli as speakers:

Radtke said that she had considered running for the state Senate next year but that she began thinking about the U.S. Senate instead after Virginia's first tea party convention, which drew an estimated 2,800 people to Richmond in October.

Radtke, who worked for Allen for a year when he was governor and she was right out of college, said it's time for a new candidate. She said that Allen was part of "George Bush's expansion of government" when he was senator and that she was concerned about some of his stances on abortion.

Allen has said that abortions should be legal in cases of rape, incest and when the life of the mother is endangered, and he owned stock in the manufacturer of the morning-after pill.

If George Allen is deemed not conservative enough for the Republican Party, then expect many more extremist candidates like Sharron Angle and Christine O’Donnell to win contested GOP primaries. Allen hurt his chances by supporting healthcare and education initiatives that were backed by President Bush and the Republican leadership, and is also deemed too moderate because he voted to include sexual orientation under hate crimes protections and believes in exceptions under a ban on abortion.

While running for reelection in 2006, Allen received wide praise at FRC’s Values Voter Summit for his staunch conservative beliefs, but now he is under attack from the Right for being “too moderate” even though he hasn’t served in public office since he lost the 2006 race. As Corey Stewart, chairman of the Prince William County board of supervisors and a likely primary opponent, says, Allen’s “base has moved on.”

Right Wing Round-Up

  • News Hounds: Rick Santorum Explains How Repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell Is Part Of A Secularist Plot To Rid America Of Religion.
  • Alvin McEwen: Family Research Council defends itself with distorted studies . . . again.
  • Joe.My.God: Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV): I'm Sorry I Wasn't There To Vote Against DADT Repeal.
  • David Taintor @ TPM: South Carolina NAACP President Rips Secession Ball Gala.
  • Steve Benen: The Politics of Spite.

DADT Repeal Means America Now No Better Than Sodom and Gomorrah

Yesterday we noted that Richard Land was warning that repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell was going to incite God to unleash his judgment upon America.

Today, the Family Research Council Senior Fellow for National Security Bob Maginnis is warning that it's repeal means that America is now no better than Sodom and Gomorrah:

Lt. Col. Bob Maginnis (USA-Ret.), who was part of the working group that helped craft the 1993 ban, says contrary to what the president says, the U.S. military will be weaker as a result of this change.

"Most of us who are veterans are going to say, 'Well, they have gone much too far' and that we should not encourage our children, nor anyone in our sphere of influence, to join the military today," he suggests.

...

[H]e laments that the military has refused to recommend segregating the homosexuals from heterosexual service members out of concern of antagonizing the homosexuals. So he decides America is now no better than Sodom and Gomorrah, the biblical cities mentioned in Genesis that are synonymous with impenitent sin that brought God's wrath upon them.

Abstinence-Only Advocates Misfire on New Teen Pregnancy Data

A new report by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention found that the birthrate among teenagers in 2009 has fallen to a historic new low. Even though the teen birthrate experienced a dramatic decline during the 1990s, it began increasing again in 2000. Experts mainly pointed to the economic recession and changes in the job market that have disproportionably impacted young people. Bill Albert of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy explained that teens may have been impacted by the recession hitting close to home: “Their parents might be struggling to make house payments. They might know neighbors who have lost jobs and can't find jobs.” In addition, lower immigration rates may have also contributed to the reduction.

But now organizations that back abstinence-only-until-marriage school programs, including the National Abstinence Education Association and the Family Research Council, are trying to twist the data to show that their opposition to comprehensive sexual education has paid off:

"These trends show that the risk-avoidance message of abstinence has 'sticking power' for young people," said Valerie Huber of the National Abstinence Education Association. "This latest evidence shows that teen behaviors increasingly mirror the skills they are taught in a successful abstinence education program."

Huber and others noted that the Obama administration has significantly reduced funding for abstinence-focused programs.

"With a change in policy away from abstinence education, we may expect to see a reversal of the teen pregnancy birthrate in the years to come," said Jeanne Monahan of the Family Research Council.

However, the CDC study does not credit abstinence-only programs, and doesn’t even mention “abstinence.”

According to the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS), while “abstinence-only-until-marriage [programs] have been around for well over 25 years” there “are still no published studies in peer-reviewed journals that shows that these programs are effective.” In fact, a recent study in the Journal of Adolescent Health found that “adolescents who received comprehensive sex education had a lower risk of pregnancy than adolescents who received abstinence-only or no sex education.” In addition, a study conducted by Mathematic Policy Research on behalf of Congress found that abstinence-only programs “show no significant impact on teen sexual activity” and “no differences in rates of unprotected sex.”

Since peer-reviewed examinations into the effectiveness of abstinence-only programs continue to show that abstinence-only curriculums have completely failed to meet their goals of reducing sexual activity and teen pregnancy, abstinence-only advocates now are trying to distort a study that doesn’t even mention abstinence to prove the efficacy of their programs.

Will The Right File Suit To Stop DADT Repeal? (UPDATED)

Judging by Monday's "Washington Update" from the Family Research Council, they seemed resigned to the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell

It's been a long, hard fight. And as sobering as the outcome may be, we can all be proud that we stood our ground and did what was right for our soldiers and our country. Now it's time to leave the outcome, however ominous it may be, in the hands of the Lord.

But that apparent resignation did not last long, as the very next day FRC announced that they would be working with Sen. John McCain and other Republicans on ways to limit and ultimately repeal it:

As for FRC, who will take great pleasure in seeing this lame-duck finally limp out of town, we'll be spending the next couple of weeks reassessing the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" debate. In fact, I've already been in conversations with Hill leaders about holding hearings in the New Year, as well as statutory and legislative oversight steps that can be taken to turn back aspects of the repeal and slow down--if not stop--the rest. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and others will be working with FRC to put a strict evaluation process in place. We want to ensure that the Pentagon is monitoring the effect of this radical change on the men and women in harm's way. One way to do that is demanding specific measurables--like tracking the sexual assaults, dips in recruitment and retention, combat distractions, and more. If there's the slightest disruption to the military's mission, you can bet that FRC will be on the Hill, demanding to revisit this repeal.

And it looks like FRC also expects to see suits filed to stop it:

Of course, back when federal District Judge Virginia Phillips struck down DADT in September, FRC blasted her "judicial activism":

This is the very definition of judicial activism -- when you are unable to achieve your desired policy goals through the democratic process, simply go to court and get a judge to decree that it must be so.

But now that Religious Right was to unable to achieve its desired policy goals through the democratic process, they have apparently decided to simply go to court and try to get a judge to decree that it must be so.

UPDATE: FRC's Tom McClusky has informed us that the Fox 5 report misrepresented the point that he was making, which was that he believes that lawsuits will be filed by those who pushed for the DADT repeal, citing it as they seek other changes in policy regarding things like Defense of Marriage Act and various benefits currently available to only married couples. FRC would not file and would not support lawsuits seeking to overturn the repeal of DADT, as the organization believes this is not a matter for the courts to decide because the US Constitution clearly leaves it up to Congress.
 

Sharron Angle Pondering Second Statewide Run

After being lifted from fringe figure in the Nevada State Assembly to become an all-star for Religious Right and Tea Party groups across the country, Sharron Angle is now plotting her next move after losing to Harry Reid in November. Even though voters in Nevada rejected Angle in three separate elections, including races for the State Senate, House, and US Senate, Angle is floating another bid for higher office.

According to Guy Benson, the political editor of the conservative Townhall.com, Angle may be a candidate for “statewide office” in 2012 despite her humbling loss to Reid:

Amidst the blame game, Angle is plotting her next move. A well-informed source says Angle is seriously considering another run for statewide office. “Running for office gets in your blood,” the source said. “Sharron’s developed a huge donor list, she has lots of national connections, so there are several options she’s weighing.” This confidant wouldn’t say whether Angle has her eyes on John Ensign’s seat in 2012, but said she would likely make a decision about her future by “late spring.” Others dispute that any such explicit timetable exists, referencing post-election interviews in which Angle more vaguely mentions contemplating “lots of options.”

In fact, Angle’s recent moves suggest that her political career is far from over. Angle bragged during her concession speech about her fundraising capabilities and help from donors outside of the state, and many of her Tea Party supporters and campaign workers didn’t even want her to concede to Reid at all and instead “charge voter fraud.” And just last week she announced the creation of the Patriot Caucus, which will help her preserve her fundraising capabilities and political standing. Already, the group is building ties to key players in the Nevada Tea Party, including Eric Odom of Liberty.com.

If Angle wants to run statewide, US Senate may be her only option since the races for Governor, Lt. Governor, Attorney General, State Controller and Treasurer were all decided this November. The incumbent Republican John Ensign has been dogged by ethics scandals and many Republicans expect him to be challenged in a primary. Angle has experience running against leading Republican figures, running unsuccessfully against State Senate Republican Leader Bill Raggio in 2006 and defeating the former Nevada Republican Party Chairwoman Sue Lowden in the 2010 primary.

Following his vote in favor of repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, Ensign made himself a top target of groups such as the Family Research Council which vowed to back and finance a primary challenger to anyone who voted to repeal DADT. Now, they may look to Angle to rally Religious Right activists and her Tea Party brethren to make another run for the Senate.

The Right Falls Noticeably Silent on DADT Vote

Ever since the Senate voted to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell on Saturday afternoon, I have been scouring Religious Right websites trying to collect official statements that groups have released in response and have noticed that outside of a handful of groups, the vast majority of the movement has been utterly silent.

When Judge Vaughan Walker struck down Proposition 8, Religious Right leaders were falling over one another to release statements decrying it ... but the repeal of DADT has largely yielded collective silence. 

So far, we have not heard a peep about the vote from the American Center for Law and Justice, Concerned Women for America, The Eagle Forum, Focus on the Family, the Traditional Values Coalition, The Christian Anti-Defamation Commission [Update: TVC and CADC statements added here,] Vision America, The Christian Coalition, Renewing America Leadership or anything from conservative leaders like Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, James Dobson, Newt Gingrich, or Richard Land [Update: Land has responded as well].

Most amazingly, Pat Robertson didn't even bother to comment on the vote after the segment about it on today's 700 Club  ... though the story did include this quote from the Family Research Council's Tony Perkins saying the Senate would have blood on their hands:

Obviously, these other groups and leaders could still release statements - and if they do, we'll include them in our collection of responses - but the vote happened two days ago and so far it is safe to say that the response from the Religious Right to the vote to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell has been near-universal silence.

Syndicate content

Family Research Council Top Posts

One thing was clear at last week’s Values Voter Summit: many of the Religious Right’s leaders and allied politicians know that their stances on abortion rights and LGBT equality are becoming more and more toxic to the average voter, and less and less popular within the GOP. Many speakers at the conference tried to reframe the debate on issues such as same-sex marriage, insisting that opponents of LGBT rights are becoming an oppressed minority in America. This delusion even seeped into matters such as foreign policy, with speakers attacking President Obama as an Islamist... MORE >
801 G Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 www.frc.org President: Tony Perkins Date of founding: 1983 Membership: 455,000 members. Finances: $10 million (2000 revenue)   MORE >

Family Research Council Posts Archive

Kyle Mantyla, Monday 03/04/2013, 3:15pm
The Family Research Council's Jerry Boykin was the guest on "WallBuilders Live" today for a discussion of the Pentagon's recent decision to lift the ban on women serving in combat.  Not surprisingly, Boykin opposes the idea, wondering why the Obama Administration would approve this change even as Congress was working to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act, claiming "there is such an inconsistency here": The Congress, the Senate at least, passed the Violence Against Women Act which was designed to protect our women. Now it had some flaws in it, so we... MORE >
Brian Tashman, Monday 03/04/2013, 12:15pm
Conservative activists are in an uproar over a new transgender-inclusive policy in Massachusetts [PDF] designed to prevent gender identity-discrimination in schools. Today, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council added his voice, arguing that Massachusetts schools will soon see “teenage boys invading girls’ locker rooms.” He blamed the new policy on the 2004 legalization of same-sex marriage in the state, which he said led to “the fundamental altering of society,” and called on parents “to protect your kids from a fate like Massachusetts’s”... MORE >
Peter Montgomery, Friday 03/01/2013, 2:08pm
While the Supreme Court prepares to take up cases on marriage equality, the Family Research Council’s latest mailing [PDF] takes on ENDA – the federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act.  “Like a B-grade 1950’s horror-movie, ENDA is coming back from the dead,” warns FRC President Tony Perkins. Perkins says President Obama is working with the “totalitarian homosexual lobby” to sneak ENDA into law, and if that happens, “Our freedom of religion will be destroyed.” The American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer sounded a similar... MORE >
Josh Glasstetter, Thursday 02/28/2013, 6:17pm
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, made an interesting observation on his radio show yesterday. Speaking about the confirmation of Chuck Hagel, Perkins mused about the ‘irony’ that Hagel, whom he considers to be anti-Israel, was backed by Democratic senators who are “mostly aligned with a lot of the Jewish lobby” and “enjoy the money coming from the Jewish community.” Hmmm, “Jewish lobby,” where have I heard that before? Hagel has been savaged in recent weeks for having used the phrase in a 2006 interview. He has since... MORE >
Brian Tashman, Thursday 02/28/2013, 4:45pm
Family Research Council president Tony Perkins yesterday on his radio program said that Right Wing Watch and progressive organizations “make their living by lying” about topics such as the separation of church and state and have had devastating consequences. Perkins brought up a case about a student who was allegedly disciplined for praying over his meal during lunch, saying that it represented the result of “the misinformation that is put out there by these liberal groups.” While Perkins didn’t name anyone in particular, it sounded remarkably... MORE >
Brian Tashman, Wednesday 02/27/2013, 6:35pm
When the U.S. Senate finally confirmed Chuck Hagel to head the Department of Defense yesterday, Religious Right leaders who actively campaigned and prayed against his nomination were sorely disappointed. The Family Research Council’s prayer team today warned that Hagel, along with President Obama, have put America “on dangerous ground” as “those in power have forgotten God's covenant with Abraham: to bless those who bless Israel and curse those who curse her.” Indeed, FRC suggests that Hagel’s confirmation may even bring about the judgment of God:... MORE >
Brian Tashman, Friday 02/22/2013, 6:45pm
Even though studies keep proving that morning-after pills don’t cause abortion, Religious Right groups will continue to baselessly argue otherwise.  Family Research Council invites you to the National Organization for Marriage’s anti-gay Marriage March. Yet another tough break for professional vote-suppressor Hans von Spakovsky.  Anyone want to buy Human Events? AFA’s Buster Wilson is mad at us because we quoted him verbatim.  Rick Warren is very, very, very sad that Tim Tebow pulled out of his appearance at Robert Jeffress... MORE >
Peter Montgomery, Wednesday 02/20/2013, 6:27pm
The Family Research Council hosted a panel discussion Wednesday on religious liberty in America.  If you have paid any attention at all to the frantic warnings from FRC’s Tony Perkins that tyranny is on the march, you could have guessed what was coming.  The overall theme of the conversation was that the HHS mandate for insurance coverage of contraception is a dire threat to religious freedom in America.  So are the advance of marriage equality and laws against anti-gay discrimination – or the “sexual liberty agenda.” The panel featured three lawyers:... MORE >