OneNewsNow

Just like last year, the Florida Family Association is getting ready to fly banners condemning “Gay Day” at Disney World this June.

In a press release, the group notes that “the State of Florida does NOT prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation,” urging Disney to exercise its “right to prohibit people from entering the park with tee shirts that promote LGBT behavior.”

FFA head David Caton told the American Family Association’s OneNewsNow the organization has two planes flying banners in English and Spanish telling people to avoid Disney World out of fear that there will be people “promoting their various alternative lifestyles.”

The AFA’s One Million Moms is also upset about Gay Day, urging members to contact Disney and tell them that they are acting in an “irresponsible” way by not forbidding the event which “is planned with the intent to expose and desensitize children to this lifestyle by same-sex couples holding hands, hugging and kissing.”

Gay Day at the Magic Kingdom in Disney World on Saturday, June 1, 2013 will expose thousands of children to lifestyle. Please send your email to officials.

How would you feel if you entered the Magic Kingdom anticipating a normal day of fun with your family only to witness thousands of same-sex couples holding hands, hugging, kissing and wearing tee-shirts that promoted their lifestyle?

…

Disney’s official email response to critics of Gay Day erroneously pretends that they have nothing to do with Gay Day and have no control over who enters their park. Disney’s email response is posted below. The following facts clearly contradict Disney’s position.

• Disney has prohibited drag queens from entering the Magic Kingdom following Gay Day 1991 when even the mainstream media reported in a negative light the estimated 1,800 cross dressers in the park with children. Yet, Disney continues to allow thousands of people to wear shirts promoting homosexuality.

• Dozens of gang members visiting Disneyland in California have been evicted after entering the park wearing gang colors according to Kenneth Green, Director of Corporate Communications. He said the company was concerned the groups might intimidate or invoke fear in the hearts of regular patrons.

So, Disney can see where a dozen people wearing gang colors might be offensive to regular families but not thousands of same-sex revelers wearing shirts that flaunt and promote homosexual, lesbian and transgender behavior.

• Disney provided special group discount tickets with a pink Mickey logo for Gay Day Patrons.

• Disney paid personnel to hand out special pamphlets to Gay Day patrons informing them of organized activities.

• Disney paid personnel to greet Gay Day patrons at the front gate.

• Disney recruited employees to be guides for special groups of Gay Day patrons.

• Disney gave free Disney tee shirts to people who complained that they did not know that the red shirt they innocently wore meant they supported Gay Day.

• The State of Florida does NOT prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Disney has clearly played a role in helping to sponsor this event for years and allows activities they could otherwise prevent. Disney has the right to prohibit people from entering the park with tee shirts that promote LGBT behavior but deliberately chooses to allow this to occur in the midst of thousands of children.

Last week, young earth Creationist leader Ken Ham lashed out at Pat Robertson for disputing the belief that Earth is approximately 6,000 years old. Now the American Family Association’s news arm OneNewsNow is out with a story, “Christian Broadcaster Straying From Scripture?” The AFA quotes a member of Ham’s Answers in Genesis skewering Robertson for insisting that humans did not live side-by-side with the dinosaurs:

Dr. Terry Mortenson of Answers in Genesis (AIG), who disagrees with Robertson, notes that the television show host challenges James Ussher, the renowned former archbishop of Ireland who traced the earth's creation based on the Bible and took the Bible as the Word of God.

"[Ussher] came up with a date of 4004 [B.C.] for creation by taking the genealogies in Genesis 5 and 11 as complete chronologies with no missing names, which is the way the church took those genealogies for 1,800 years," Dr. Mortenson explains. "So, he was just being a very, very careful student of the Scriptures and the chronological information given in Scripture."

Moreover, the AIG researcher notes that Robertson's claim that dinosaurs existed before biblical times is illogical, because there is no pre-biblical time; the Bible starts with the creation of the world.

Robertson also mentioned science's reliance on carbon dating, which Dr. Mortenson says reveals Robertson's ignorance on the subject.

"Carbon-14 is never used to date rocks or dinosaur bones; it's other dating methods which have much longer half-lives," Mortenson reports. "The maximum age you could date anything with radio carbon dating is about 80,000 or 100,000 years at the max, and dinosaurs supposedly lived 65 million to 245 million years ago. So he's really not informed on the dating methods."

AIG maintains that the Bible remains the true and final authority on the subject.

Last week we reported that the Family Research Council asked members to pray against “homosexual tyranny” in America after the federal government agreed to have Blue Cross Blue Shield offer full benefits for a same-sex spouse of a federal employee after a judge ruled in favor of the employee in her lawsuit against the Defense of Marriage Act. Naturally, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality president Peter LaBarbera is demanding that Congress impeach President Obama as a result of his administration’s decision to grant her health benefits:

"This is another shocking act by the Obama administration, which has got to be the most arrogant and Constitution-abusing president in America's history," he decides. "The Obama administration didn't like the Defense of Marriage Act, which was passed by Congress [and] signed into law by then-President Clinton, and so now they're just ignoring it and blatantly disregarding it."

This particular case, however, is not over, as Republicans have appealed the district court's decision, which has no effect on enrollments requested by other same-sex couples. Even though the law is being challenged in court, LaBarbera says it is still the law.

"I believe that President Obama should be impeached on this alone," he suggests. "He's not dictator of the United States of America; he's president, and he can't just ignore the law, ignore the Constitution, to pander to his homosexual activist base."

With Washington’s state legislature set to vote on a marriage equality bill introduced by Governor Christine Gregoire, Republican state senator Val Stevens is leading the fight against the legislation. Stevens, who in 2009 said that the state’s domestic partnership law represents an “assault on our families and American culture by the homosexuals” that would legitimize the “depraved lifestyle” of gays and lesbians, told the vehemently anti-gay American Family Association’s OneNewsNow today that the marriage equality bill “opens the floodgates” for the legalization of polygamy, incest and pedophilia. According to Stevens, the marriage equality legislation must be stopped “for the sake of maintaining our stable society”:

Governor Chris Gregoire (D) is personally introducing a bill that would legalize same-gender marriage in a state where domestic partnerships are already law. Senator Val Stevens (R) will be part of the legislative army opposing the move.

She contends, "To diminish the value of marriage between one man and one woman only opens the floodgates for who knows what might come down the road," such as polygamy, incestuous marriage, or an adult marrying a child.

…

Though there will be a fight in the legislature, Stevens says those fighting to defend traditional marriage really need pastors to step forward to educate their congregations and "get them out of the pews, calling their legislators to make certain that they will be actively opposing this movement to undermine the standard that is biblically based."

Stevens also does not understand why the governor wants lawmakers to spend their time with such a hot-button social and moral issue while the state is facing such a serious budget crunch.

In response to the governor's announcement, Stevens issued a statement that says, "Marriage between one man and one woman gives strength to society," and she points out that the state constitution "protects freedom of conscience and our religious heritage." So she pledges to oppose the legislation proposal "for the sake of maintaining our stable society."

With the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell fully in effect, the doomsday predictions of right-wing naysayers failed to materialize as no incidents have been reported. But that hasn’t stopped supporters of the discriminatory policy from continuing to criticize the military and attack openly gay service members, and the two women sailors who won a raffle to share the traditional ‘first kiss’ are now in the Religious Right’s crosshairs. Randy Thomasson of Save California railed against the kiss between Petty Officer 2nd Class Marissa Gaeta and her girlfriend Petty Officer 3rd Class Citlalic Snell, and told the American Family Association’s OneNewsNow that the Navy is now engaging in “perverse social engineering” on behalf of “an aggressive homosexual activist community”:

Randy Thomasson of SaveCalifornia.com is familiar with the tactics of homosexual activists in California, home to both Gaeta and Snell.

"San Diego, being the top Navy port on the West Coast, has an aggressive homosexual activist community which is just applauding this big time, saying 'it's delightful,' saying, 'it's fantastic,'" he laments.

Sailors purchased $1 tickets at a raffle to raise money for a Christmas party for children whose parents are in the military. Gaeta purchased $50 worth of tickets, and the lesbian couple was chosen to have the first kiss.

Thomasson argues that is not what the military is for. "It's about a fighting force to defend our shores, to defend our interests, and to advance the cause of the United States' security in the world," he tells OneNewsNow. "I would not make it social engineering that the Navy has done it, and now perverse social engineering."

A new movie looking at Joseph Smith’s campaign for president and assassination in 1844 and connecting Smith’s legacy to contemporary Mormon politicians like Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman is supposed to present a “balanced” look at the Mormon religion and history. Director Adam Christing, who was raised a Mormon but who is not a member of the LDS Church, said the film, A Mormon President, is neither a “puff piece” nor a “hit piece” on Mormonism:

Already in this election cycle, we have seen American Family Association spokesman Bryan Fischer claim that Mormons are deceived by Satan and do not have First Amendment rights, right-wing radio talk show host Janet Mefferd mock Romney for thinking that being president is a “step down” because he is going “to be a god” in the afterlife, and of course, pastor and Rick Perry-endorser Robert Jeffress attacked the Mormon faith as a cult from the “pit of Hell.”

In an interview with the AFA’s OneNewsNow, Christing noted concerns about the “conflict between [Romney’s] loyalty to the Constitution and his loyalty to the Mormon Church”:

Christing, who is a member of the Mormon History Association, says pastors are concerned that as a temple Mormon, Romney took a vow called the Oath of Consecration.

"He pledges all of his time, talent, and money to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. So some people are very concerned that if push came to shove and there was a conflict between his loyalty to the Constitution and his loyalty to the Mormon Church, many fear that the loyalty would be to the church," the filmmaker explains.

But the filmmaker remarks that those fears might not matter when Christians go into the voting booth. "I did talk to many evangelicals who feel like they would vote against Obama and for Romney -- almost like they would choose their wallets over their worship, voting for the lesser of two evils," Christing accounts.

So he hopes the documentary will help people make up their own minds about whether Mormonism should even be a factor if a Mormon contender is on the ballot in 2012.

Radio talk show host Peter Heck is livid about the success of the “anti-family, pro-sexual anarchy movement” that he blames for increasing support in America for gay rights and marriage equality. Heck, who rarely has kind words for the gay community, writes in a column this week for the American Family Association’s OneNewsNow that gay rights advocates are denigrating the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and the Civil Rights movement.

Heck, addressing Jesse Jackson’s observation that Occupy Wall Street is making use of some of the same tools and ideas that Dr. King used, writes that Jackson’s comparison “is only slightly less offensive” than comparisons of the gay rights movement to the civil rights movement. In contrast to Dr. King’s movement, Heck writes, the gay rights movement is composed of “grown men prancing around American city streets in tutus and G-strings, flinging pixie dust and condoms”:

Jackson's false comparison is only slightly less offensive than those who claim to see a connection between Dr. King's street prayer vigils and the grown men prancing around American city streets in tutus and G-strings, flinging pixie dust and condoms at their gay pride parades. King preached fidelity to biblical morality, something eschewed by the sexual anarchists of the left.

On his radio show last week, Heck, incensed that gay and lesbian couples now have the right to marry in several states, reminisced about the days when homosexuality was “a forbidden vice” and was “something that was against the law.” He took issue with the Supreme Court’s 2003 decision in Lawrence v. Texas, which struck down state laws criminalizing sodomy, and wondered how “we have gone from something—the day before that ruling, homosexuality, a vice something that is illegal to be done, to the point where we are now where you have Governor Cuomo marching in the streets of New York celebrating the codifying of homosexual relationships.”

Listen:

When you step back, and you look at what has been achieved by this anti-family, pro-sexual anarchy movement and crowd and the left in just the last just ten years alone it’s remarkable. I don’t know if remarkable is the right descriptor for it but it’s unbelievable. How does that happen? Let’s zero in on homosexuality, specifically the practice of homosexuality, how does something go from being a forbidden vice, which is what it was, something that was against the law, to the point where it is now being publicly embraced and endorsed by sitting governors and even presidents of the United States? How does that happen? In such a short period of time, how does that happen? Relatively short, we’re talking what, a couple decades? When was the sodomy case, I mean it was what, the ’90s? I’ll have to look it up I don’t know the exact date but it hasn’t been that long ago that sodomy was allowed by the Court, and in that period of time we have gone from something—the day before that ruling, homosexuality, a vice something that is illegal to be done, to the point where we are now, where you have Governor Cuomo marching in the streets of New York celebrating the codifying of homosexual relationships. How does that happen in such a short period of time?

• FRC has released its Congressional scorecards.

 

• I look forward to watching the Religious Right turn this pastor who was arrested for protesting a high school's demon mascot into their newest cause célèbre.

 

• Is Charisma Magazine, which routinely features people like Lou Engle and Cindy Jacobs, really suggesting that people should be jailed for delivering false prophecies?

 

• Gary Cass bravely launched a new "anti-bullying campaign" yesterday - by which he means "an anti-Muslim campaign."

 

• Finally, Mat Staver says "I think what we see is militant atheism trying to use the courts to literally crush Christianity, silence anyone who believes in God, and to make those who do a target of punishment."  I think Staver doesn't understand what the word "literally" means.

Conservative commentator Thomas Sowell writes today in his weekly column that efforts to combat the bullying of LGBT youth are meant to “advance the agenda of homosexual organizations and can turn homosexuality into yet another of the subjects on which words on only one side are permitted.” According to Sowell, anti-bullying efforts are merely a ruse to promulgate “propaganda for politically correct causes that are in vogue”:

Most of the stories about the bullying of gays in schools are about words directed against them, not about their suffering the violence that has long been directed against Asian youngsters or about the failure of the authorities to do anything serious to stop black kids from beating up Asian kids.

Where youngsters are victims of violence, whether for being gay or whatever, that is where the authorities need to step in. No decent person wants to see kids hounded, whether by words or deeds, and whether the kids are gay, Asian or whatever.

But there is still a difference between words and deeds -- and it is a difference we do not need to let ourselves be stampeded into ignoring. The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees freedom of speech -- and, like any other freedom, it can be abused.

If we are going to take away every Constitutional right that has been abused by somebody, we are going to end up with no Constitutional rights.

…

Meanwhile, a law has been passed in California that mandates teaching about the achievements of gays in the public schools. Whether this will do anything to stop either verbal or physical abuse of gay kids is very doubtful.

But it will advance the agenda of homosexual organizations and can turn homosexuality into yet another of the subjects on which words on only one side are permitted. Our schools are already too lacking in the basics of education to squander even more time on propaganda for politically correct causes that are in vogue. We do not need to create special privileges in the name of equal rights.