Alan Keyes

During yet another appearance on the Talk to Solomon Show, Alan Keyes maintained that allowing young people to obtain condoms is like a parent who “handed their child a six-shot revolver with one bullet in it and said, ‘go ahead and play spin the barrel and put the barrel to your head and fire,’ that’s what you’re doing when you tell them that they’re safe using a condom.”

Keyes added that a condom “is not real protection” as it “is not going to protect you over 80 percent of the time,” which is laughably untrue.

“It’s essentially playing a kind of biased game of Russian roulette,” Keyes continued, “We’re pretending that encouraging our kids to do this is consistent with loving them and with having a responsible attitude toward them, that’s insane.”

Watch:

Alan Keyes is out with a new column today arguing that Christians should not shy away from violence in the face of the “gruesome violence [that] is being done to Christians.” He also argues that the U.S. government may soon join in on the anti-Christian “genocidal threats," perhaps as a result of the gay rights movement.

“[I]t's not at all unreasonable to see, in certain recurring reports, signs that the U.S. government is preparing our military forces to do violence against Christian denominations that refuse to abandon God's Word on matters like homosexuality,” Keyes writes, urging Christians to “be prepared to execute God's law” and “release the power of God's Word against the perpetrator of evil.”

Ironically, in these offensively evil times, self-professed Christians who feel outrage at the thought of associating Christ with violence may be playing into the hands of Christ's adversary. After all, incomprehensibly massive, government- perpetrated slaughters occurred with striking regularity during the twentieth century. Today, in various parts of the world, gruesome violence is being done to Christians with frequency. Events in Africa and the Middle East have Christians and Jews being systematically targeted for violence by groups that have seized control of governments, or are poised to do so.

Moreover, it's not at all unreasonable to see, in certain recurring reports, signs that the U.S. government is preparing our military forces to do violence against Christian denominations that refuse to abandon God's Word on matters like homosexuality. Just the other day, I read that "soldiers in the U.S. military have been told in a training briefing that evangelical Christians are the No. 1 extremist threat to America....Catholicism and ultra-orthodox Judaism are also on the list of religious extremist organizations."

Given these signs of the times, the notion that "gentle Jesus, meek and mild" is the only accurate, Gospel-authorized example for Christians may ironically lead them to strike a pose of defenseless piety in the face of these genocidal threats. Since the prospect of an easy kill emboldens cowardly bullies, this defenseless pose increases their temptation to do evil. Are Christians required to become a near occasion of sin for those inclined to prey upon the defenseless? Are we required by Christ's example to make ourselves fodder for evil?

…

Righteous action thus requires, in the first instance, people who are willing, as Christ was, to give their lives in order to release the power of God's Word against the perpetrator of evil. But people of goodwill who witness it are authorized to take action against the perpetrator, on account of their respect for God. But in order to do, in this respect, what the Word of God authorizes them to do, they must be equipped for action, in spiritual and material terms. They must be prepared to execute God's law.

After arguing that gay marriage will lead to a Communist government that murders the masses, Alan Keyes later told talk show host Stan Solomon that Satan is using gay-inclusive TV shows to destroy America.

Keyes claimed that “a key vehicle” for Satan’s plan to bring about the country’s “destruction” is the use of music, television shows and movies that “promote the acceptance of homosexuality.”

“It is almost as if they are creating programming now with the purpose of luring people into an experience that they can then use to promote these lies,” he said.

Later, Solomon agreed and warned that “homosexuality is destructive of the individual, destructive of the society and every society in the history of the world that has accepted homosexuality has crashed and burned,” before alleging that gay people were behind Nazism.

Watch:

Keyes: We need to keep in mind that the Devil is not playing; he’s deadly serious about the destruction of America’s character, spiritual nature and the foundations of that way of life which stood against the devilish work in the 20th century and defeated it soundly again and again. I think we are on the shortlist of most hated in the history of mankind and that United States of America, grounded in the principles of the Declaration, is targeted by the Adversary for destruction. The way of destruction is not the way some people think, money and the collapse of the economy, that’s all a consequence of the destruction of the moral understanding and moral character that made the regime possible in the first place and that has sustained our constitutional self-government since it was founded.

All of that is being destroyed and a key vehicle for doing that is what you might call the popular culture of entertainment: music, television shows, movies. I’ve noticed for instance that every form of entertainment now is being programmed to promote the acceptance of homosexuality, every form of it. You watch anything and there’s going to be contained within it this message. It is almost as if they are creating programming now with the purpose of luring people into an experience that they can then use to promote these lies.

…

Solomon: The fact is, there’s these little innuendos and some direct frontal attacks saying if you don’t accept homosexuality there’s something wrong with you. Well, there’s something right with you. Homosexuality is destructive of the individual, destructive of the society and every society in the history of the world that has accepted homosexuality has crashed and burned. Someone tell me where I’m wrong. Many people don’t know that the Nazi party was born out of a homosexual group; they call it the pink swastika.

As the Supreme Court debated the Prop 8 and DOMA cases, Alan Keyes argued that gay rights are incompatible with both the Constitution and even the Declaration of Independence, calling marriage equality the “archetype of all crimes against humanity.”

His core argument is that the government can only recognize rights that are compatible with God’s law. Since he believes homosexuality is an affront to divine law, it cannot be approved of in the US.

Paul Fidalgo today noticed a speech Keyes delivered at a college in Michigan, where he made the case that the government can’t recognize gay rights, reproductive rights and the separation of church and state, just as we shouldn’t recognize the right of a person to pick their nose and eat their boogers.

MLive.com reports:

Just because something “feels right” doesn’t mean it is a “fundamental right” in God’s eyes.

That’s what former presidential candidate Alan Keyes said while speaking to a group of 100 people Wednesday, April 10 at Spring Arbor University as part of the university’s Thomas H. Cobb President’s Leadership Speaker Series.

Keyes passionately spoke on the topic of basic fundamental rights that were first laid out in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution of the United States, he said.

“The Republic is near death and it will die if we don’t wake up," he said. "But wake up to what?”

He answered his own question when talking about fundamental rights, where they came from and how the country needs to recognize that rights come from God.

Abortion, same-sex marriage and separation of church and state are not fundamental rights, Keyes said. If God does not recognize them, they do not exist.

…

Keyes said while abortion, same-sex marriage and separation of church and state are not basic human rights there are leaders who are trying to “fabricate” rights.

“People who sit on the U.S. Supreme Court take it among themselves to argue that somehow there should be separation of church and state,” he said. “Nothing in the Constitution requires separation, nor could it because we cannot separate the country from its finding premise without destroying it.”

When arguing what a fundamental right actually is, Keyes gave an offbeat example of a young child who had a habit of “picking in their nostrils and “eating what came out.”

As the child grew up they noticed others were disgusted and did not want to be near him. As an adult the individual argued if others have the right to eat what they want, the individual should be recognized as having the same right.

“How many think that is a fundamental right?” he asked the audience. No one raised their hand.

“Nobody in their right mind would suggest it was,” Keyes said. “What makes something a fundamental right that actually trumps the Constitution of the United States? It can’t just be because you feel like it, or want to do it. It can’t just be that you feel badly about what you do because of the opinions of others, these are not arguments of rights...rights come from God.”

Alan Keyes once again appeared on Stan Solomon’s talk show, this time to discuss their stringent opposition to marriage equality.

After host, Steve Davis, claimed that just because they “oppose homosexual marriage or homosexual adoptions, it doesn’t mean that we’re homophobes,” Solomon insisted that he is indeed a homophobe.

“Speak for yourself,” Solomon said, “I can’t stand the thought, the idea, the concept of homosexuality.”

“I don’t think I’m showing love for anyone if I encourage them or enable them or stand silently while they do something that’s going to kill them; the average homosexual lives half the adult life of the average heterosexual, fact,” Solomon maintained, as he went on to comparing homosexuality to drug abuse, drunk driving and swimming with sharks.

Keyes, who kicked his daughter out of his house after she came out of the closet, agreed with Solomon’s anti-gay statements.

Later, Keyes attacked Sen. Rob Portman’s for endorsing marriage equality after learning that his son is gay: “If you go down a road that satisfies your personal predilections and relationships and sacrifices the common good of the country, including the elementary institution by which civilization is sustained, then you’re not only derelict in your public duty, you are abandoning your obligation as a human being.”

“Frankly, people throw around words like ‘crime against humanity,’ I think that kind of disregard for the God-endowed natural rights of human being is the archetype of all crimes against humanity,” Keyes concluded, “and I think we have an entire elite faction that is now committed to committing such a crime against the American people.”

Watch:

• The American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer responds to Rob Portman’s announcement by likening gay people to bank robbers. 

• CBN correspondent David Brody warns “evangelicals all across the country may start walking away from the GOP” if Republicans aren’t “willing to take a stand for traditional marriage.” 

• Liberty Counsel’s Steve Crampton claims that gay marriage will “lead to the disintegration of the family” and that “when the history of this administration is written, it will be recorded that its deception and aggressive advocacy on this issue were among the most destructive actions of any administration in the history of our nation.” 

• Scott Lively urges lawmakers not “to arm militant ‘gay’ social engineers with legal weapons to hunt down and destroy the lives of people of faith.” 

• Jim Garlow predicts that marriage equality will have “horrific” consequences including the abolition of the First Amendment.

• Alan Sears of the Alliance Defending Freedom, while quoting Martin Luther King Jr., calls for prayers against same-sex marriage. 

• Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar’s eldest son plans to join the Family Research Council. 

• Actual Alan Keyes column: “In Defense of ‘Conspiracy Thinking.’”

• Lastly, this exists:

• For all you thespians out there, Tea Party Patriots wants you to star in their latest movie as someone either standing “in line at the Food Distribution Center to receive your ration of food” or witnessing “SWAT team arrests some member of the resistance who are protesting the big government control.”

• Rick Scarborough of Vision America is angry that “we’ve got an administration that has progressed at lightning speed to an all-out militant assault on marriage.” 

• Family Research Council is thrilled that Rick Perry and Texas Republican lawmakers have called on the Boy Scouts of America not to lift its ban on gays.

• Jeffrey Kuhner of the Washington Times argues that Obama is a weak president who is “asleep at the wheel” while at the same time a powerful “socialist autocrat.”

• Alan Keyes warns American elites will not be satisfied “until all are burning in the lake of fire, nourished with bitter ashes.”  

• We have the sneaking suspicion that Ronnie Cohen of Reuters did not want his article titled: “Poll Shows Sodom and Gomorrah Traits in Calif.”

When not warning that President Obama is pushing gun safety laws in order to have Americans “slaughtered by the thousands and the hundreds of thousands,” Alan Keyes usually sticks to issuing dire warnings about gay rights.

Today in his column for WorldNetDaily, Keyes claims that if the government repeals laws discriminating against gays and lesbians then it will have to remove laws against rape, incest and pedophilia as well.

Today the elitist faction promoters of so-called “homosexual rights” use and abuse the language of rights even though they reject the logic that, in light of America’s political heritage, invests that language with moral force. By that logic every claim of unalienable right (i.e., a right that trumps the provisions of merely human law) can be tested with a simple question: What is the provision of the “laws of nature and of nature’s God” that obliges and authorizes the action or activity the claim involves? The pursuit of pleasure, sexual or otherwise, does not in and of itself correspond to such an imperative (even though, thanks to the goodwill of the Creator, most bodily activities required for our survival, are in some degree pleasurable.) Loving human relations are of course an imperative of our nature. But loving human relations need not involve the particular physical pleasures connected with what we call “sexual relations.” If by natural necessity they must, then the prejudicial prohibitions against incest or pedophilia would be as much a violation of right as those that target homosexual relations.

Absent any God-endowed natural imperative to engage in homosexual relations, doing so is a matter of choice involving a preference for one form of sensual gratification over another. It’s absurd to suggest that government should by law, force others to approve of and accommodate such preferences, especially when doing so requires trampling on proven claims of unalienable right, like the right freely to exercise (put into practice) one’s religion. We may justly penalize the neglect of right that permits some to feast while others are denied the opportunity to glean bare subsistence from their leftovers. But it makes no sense to say that because some people want to eat pork others are forbidden to disapprove of doing so, and that the latter are required to prepare and serve it whenever pork eaters demand that they do so.

Moreover, unless we mean to repeal the laws against rape, no one can by law be forced to respect or cater to the sexual appetites of others. Even temple prostitutes could discriminate against those who desecrated the idols they served. Shall we then submit to laws that require that we violate our obligation to the Author of our nature, the very authority from which our whole people derives its right of self-government, and from which our Constitution and laws derive their claim to our allegiance and respect? As the famous American patriot said, on the eve of the war occasioned by a less egregious travesty of right, “Forbid it, Almighty God.”

Conservative leaders are continuing to rally opposition to a proposed plan to end the national ban on gay members in the Boy Scouts of America with warnings about pedophilia and “indoctrination.”

Family Research Council vice president Rob Schwarzwalder told Janet Mefferd yesterday that fathers cannot trust their sons to be around gay people.

Mefferd called gay rights advocates “totalitarian” for opposing the ban and lamented that the “violins are playing full blast” in the media when they cover stories about gay youths kicked out of the Boy Scouts.

Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel said in a statement that “people like Jerry Sandusky” would be “permitted to be Scoutmasters” if the policy changes, adding, “To allow homosexual Scoutmasters or homosexual Scouts will put young boys at risk.”

Concerned Women for America started a letter-writing campaign against the move before gays attempt “to infiltrate the next generation.” The group even claimed that if gays are allowed to join the Boy Scouts, it would mean that “our religious liberties are being taken away”…somehow.

The Texas Pastors Council called on parents to “defend our children” and not “allow our boys to be targeted by those who believe there is no moral code and no definition of gender” and stop those who are bent on “forcing their immorality on society.”

Pastors, if the scouts fall, the church is next in the sights of the activists committed to forcing their immorality on society – WILL YOU COME?

Fathers, if we allow our boys to be targeted by those who believe there is no moral code and no definition of gender – WHO WILL DEFEND OUR CHILDREN?

Mothers, your voice of courage and protection of the virtue of our children is desperately needed – WILL YOU STAND ALSO?

Florida Family Policy Council president John Stemberger went on another anti-gay rant, alleging that the BSA will “open a can of worms that would cause a mass exodus” and “devastate the Boy Scouts permanently.”

If the BSA departs from its policies on allowing openly homosexual scoutmasters and boys in the program it could destroy the legitimacy and the security of this iconic institution.

As an Eagle Scout, former Scoutmaster and a Vigil Honor Member of the Order of the Arrow, I have a deep personal interest in passing on the rich experience of Scouting to my two sons and I pray that the BSA does not open a can of worms that would cause a mass exodus from a program that America needs now more than ever to train boys to become responsible men. A change of this policy could transform and devastate the Boy Scouts permanently. Additionally, the vast majority of Americans do not support changing the policy to allow openly homosexual scout leaders, so this proposed change makes no sense on many levels.

2000 presidential candidate Alan Keyes in WorldNetDaily warned of “homosexual indoctrination” and “idolatry” in the Boy Scouts if they change the policy:

The simple words of the Scout Oath were meant to encourage boys in the habit of walking this straight path; hence the endeavor to be “morally straight.” But the oath first of all made it clear that the Scout looked first of all to God as the standard of moral rectitude. Try as they might, the present-day trustees of the Scouting movement will never fit the square peg of God’s standard into the round hole of homosexual sin. Moreover, though they begin by admitting practicing homosexuals into the ranks, they must end in acknowledging homosexual activity as morally correct, else they will involve the whole movement in the perjurious administration of an oath openly violated in practice. For in that moral sense, it is not possible to be gay and morally straight at the same time. Thus what the present trustees of the BSA reportedly may do involves rejecting God’s standard for male sexual behavior. And it involves doing so in a way that willfully abandons the straight path blazed by the footsteps of Christ.

…

By accepting a humanly fabricated redefinition of the moral standard, the BSA will fall prey to the inevitable logic of such idolatry. “Their idols are … the work of human hands … those who make them become like unto them; so do all who trust in them.” (Psalm 115:8) It will speedily become evident that what masquerades as tolerance is actually indoctrination, seeking to mold boys according to the standard the BSA trustees will have raised above God’s standard. For if homosexual activity is morally acceptable as an expression of love and good fellowship, then those who express their love accordingly do what is right.

But the aim of Scouting is to encourage young men to do what is right in various ways. Therefore, once the moral prejudice against homosexuality is regarded as a violation of right, doing things that habitually assault and break down this prejudice becomes part of “moral training.” Just as, on many campuses now, refusal to experiment with homosexuality is frowned upon as a sign of bigotry, so henceforth in Scouting braking down this prejudice would be recognized as a meritorious activity. Though camouflaged in different words there will be a merit badge for this experimentation as part of the regime of homosexual indoctrination. God knows what that will lead to; and given now widely publicized possibilities, so should the BSA Inc.