Connecticut

When James Holmes opened fired in a Colorado movie theater in July, killing 12 people and injuring 58 others, Operation Save America quickly issued a press release calling Holmes "an Occupy Wall Street guy" who is "the spawn of the ideology of the Democratic Party."

So it is no surprise that the group has also issued a press release following the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut, blaming it on the removal of God from public schools while calling the interfaith memorial service held on Sunday "an affront to Almighty God" for not mentioning Jesus enough:

Watching the Memorial service for the twenty-six precious lives taken from us was painful to say the least, but it was far more painful to the God who made America great. Newtown cancelled Christmas so it could properly mourn. How foolish, yet typical of governmental strategy to replace God. The "Interfaith" service was an affront to Almighty God. Those claiming to be His priests barely mentioned His Name --Jesus! After all, He is the only God there is!

"My people are destroyed from lack of knowledge. Because you have rejected knowledge, I also reject you as my priests; because you have ignored the law of your God, I also will ignore your children." Hosea 4:6.

Can there be any doubt in anyone's mind today that America is in deep trouble? Blood is coursing down the corridors of our schools, workplaces, and streets and we look at each other with awkward amazement wondering what in the world has happened to us. We are being drained of every last penny of our wealth. We are losing our kids to gangs, drugs, violence, suicide, murder and every imaginable trivial pursuit. Our schools have become veritable jungles where survival of the fittest is the law of the hallway.

What happened? We violently removed the fear of Almighty God from the hearts of our children. We expelled God from school and banished Him from the schoolyard. He was replaced with metal detectors, condoms, policemen, anti-bullying policies, No-gun zones, and violence of unprecedented order. Our strategy has replaced God's Truth. We are losing our kids because we are ignoring God's Law.

With anti-gay organizations like the American Family Association, Concerned Women for America and Liberty Counsel urging students to walkout of schools on April 20th to protest the Day of Silence, a day when students in many schools remain silent to draw attention to anti-gay bias and bullying, the Family Research Council is now endorsing one Connecticut pastor’s efforts to have the school prohibit any student from participating in the Day of Silence.

According to the New Haven Register, Loomer’s campaign is based on material from rabidly anti-gay activist Linda Harvey of Mission America, along with debunked claims that the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, which spearheads the Day of Silence, distributes pornographic material to children, pastor James Loomer of Milford is trying to convince his local school board to forbid students from partaking in the event. However, the school board’s own legal counsel and the American Civil Liberties Union notes that students have a right to participate in the Day of Silence during non-instructional time.

But Loomer’s unconstitutional and anti-gay ploy was rewarded with an interview on FRC president Tony Perkins’ radio show Washington Watch Weekly, where Loomer said that “parents will be so appalled at what the Day of Silence could lead their children into” and Perkins noted that while he opposed bullying, he also opposed anti-bullying efforts like the Day of Silence because it is “cover for the promotion of homosexuality” and commended Loomer’s efforts to ban it.

Loomer: If the board decides they don’t want to take any corrective actions we’re already making plans to call the city families together and just apprise them of the situation. I think the parents will be so appalled at what the Day of Silence could lead their children into that they’re going to want to stand up and say, ‘let’s get rid of this.’ There are alternative programs that focus on disrupting the bullying that goes on in schools but this is one that’s got a serious kickback to it.

…

Perkins: Look, bullying should not be taking place in our schools, every child in America should be able to go to school—public school, private school, wherever—without the fear of threat or being intimidated, regardless of what the cause is, whether they’re overweight, whether their religious viewpoints, no child should be bullied because they are effeminate or because of their sexual orientation or whatever, it shouldn’t happen, but we cannot allow these programs like the Day of Silence to come into our schools as a cover for the promotion of homosexuality. That’s what is happening with this so we appreciate Pastor Loomer and others who are drawing attention to this in communities across the country.

As we have noted before, actual historians tend to agree that David Barton is not a historian but rather a Religious Right activist who intentionally misrepresents history in order to promote his political agenda.

And with every presentation he delivers, Barton just reinforces that fact. 

For instance, Focus on the Family ran a two-day broadcast last week featuring one of Barton's presentation in which he made the following assertion:

You see, even in previous generations, we fully expected our military and our political leaders to be highly religious. You've probably seen lots of pictures of George Washington kneeling in prayer. And the reason you've seen so many of them is there's so much evidence to that. You have so many eyewitness testimonies of ... of people like General Henry Knox and people like General John Marshall and people like General Marquis de Lafayette. You've got the eyewitness testimony of all sorts of congressional leaders, Charles Thompson, etc. You've got the testimony of his own children, his own family, his own ministers.

There's so much out there and isn't it interest ... interesting that today George Washington has become one of our leading deist Founding Fathers? "Why, he didn't even believe in God. He wasn't religious." Now why that? Well, you find that, that has a great impact on public policy. You see you wouldn't really want it to appear that someone with the credibility of George Washington might actually endorse public religious expressions. So, what we do is make him into a nonreligious individual.

People probably have seen pictures of Washington praying, especially since Barton himself used it as the cover for his book "America's Godly Heritage":

But, as Professor John Fea explained, the incident featured in the painting probably never happened: 

There is one major problem with Potts's story of Washington praying at Valley Forge - it probably did not happen. While it is likely that Washington prayed while he was with the army at Valley Forge in the winter of 1777-1778, it is unlikely that the story reported by Potts, memorialized in paintings and read to millions of schoolchildren, is anything more than legend. It was first told in the seventeenth edition (1816) of Mason Lock Weem's Life of Washington. Weems claimed to have heard it directly from Potts, his "good old FRIEND." Potts may have owned the house where Washington stayed at Valley Forge, but his aunt Deborah Potts Hewes was living there alone at the time. Indeed, Potts was probably not even residing in Valley Forge during the encampment. And he was definitely not married.  It would be another twenty-five years before he wed Sarah, making a conversation with her in the wake of the supposed Washington prayer impossible. Another version of the story, which appeared in the diary of Reverend Nathaniel Randolph Snowden, claims that it was John Potts, Issac's brother, who heard Washington praying. These discrepancies, coupled with the fact that Weems was known for writing stories about Washington based upon scanty evidence, have led historians to discredit it.

In fact, Fea dedicated an entire chapter in his book "Was America Founded As a Christian Nation?: A Historical Introduction" to examining Washington's faith.  In it, Fea explained that, contrary to Barton's assertion, Washington's faith was very private and that often those close to him had no idea what his beliefs really were:

Lest one thing that this debate is a new one, it is worth noting that many of Washington's contemporaries also wondered whether he was a true believer. Reverend Timothy Dwight, the president of Yale College and one of the leaders of the evangelical revival known as the Second Great Awakening, felt confident that Washington was a Christian, but he was also aware that "doubts may and will exist" about the substance of his faith. Reverend Stanley Griswold, the pastor of the Congregational Church in New Milford, Connecticut knew that there were many who objected to the belief that Washington was a Christian. Thomas Jefferson was also fascinated by the question of Washington's religion. In 1800 he recorded in his private diary a bit of gossip surrounding this questions:

Dr. Rush tells me that he had it from Asa Green that when the clergy addressed Genl. Washington on his departure from the Government, it was observed in their consultation that he had never on any occasion said a word to the public which showed a belief in the Christian religion and they thought they should so pen their address as to force him at length to declare publicly whether he was a Christian or not. They did so.

However he observed the old fox was too cunning for them. He answered every article of their address particularly except that, which he passed over without notice. Rush observes he never did say a word on the subject in any of his public papers except in his valedictory letter to the Governors of the states when he resigned his commission in the army, wherein he speaks of "the benign influence of the Christian religion".

I know that Gouverneur Morris, who pretended to be in his secrets & believed himself to be so, has often told me that General Washington believed no more of that system than he himself did.

...

Many of Washington's contemporaries and people who knew him well had a lot to say about his religious faith. Bishop William White, the Episcopal bishop of Pennsylvania and Washington's pastor while he lived in Philadelphia during his years as president, said that he didn't know anything that would prove Washington believed in Christian revelation.

As Fea notes, some who knew Washington believed him to be a "truly devout man," while others said they knew nothing about his personal faith at all, leading Fea to conclude that Washington's "religious life was just too ambiguous."

But acknowledging any ambiguity would only undermine David Barton's entire professional enterprise, so he instead asserts that there is overwhelming eyewitness testimony to Washington's deep and public Christian faith ... which only goes to demonstrate, once again, that Barton has no interest in teaching, or even recognizing, history that does not promote his political agenda.

A few weeks back, we noted that Operation Save America had begun protesting mosques and screaming at worshipers that "Islam is a lie" and that "Jesus hates Muslims," forcing Muslim leaders in Connecticut to actually seek police protection from their harassment.

Today, the group announced that it intends to take its harassment to "mosques across the nation":

We, Operation Save America, are headed to Ground Zero in New York City, to begin our nationwide outreach to Muslims in America. We offer to our Muslim friends enslaved in the tyrannical bondage of Islam, the true source of liberty -- Jesus Christ!

First in New York City, then to Mosques across the nation!

The wounds that America is now suffering are, by in large, self-inflicted. We have forgotten the God who made this nation great and free. We have killed His children through abortion (over 50 million dead), called homosexuality good (an abomination in His sight), and prostrated Him to the level of all other false gods. God has not been silent. We are being judged. 9-11, the rise of Islam, and our present financial and social distresses are warnings of worse to come.

"God is calling America to repentance. We must begin here. Once we have returned to Him, we must go to those lost in the darkness and misery of Islam. We cannot build bridges or dialogue with this murderous false ideology. We are called to storm the gates of hell and set the captive free! We bring to America the warning that the rise of Islam is a sign of God's judgment upon a nation that has turned from Him!" Rev. Flip Benham, Director, Operation Save America.

The New York Times reports that protests against mosques are popping up all over the country, spurred on at least in part by the right-wing opposition to the "Ground Zero Mosque."

So I guess this sort of thing should not come as a surprise:

About a dozen right-wing Christians, carrying placards and yelling "Islam is a lie," angrily confronted worshippers outside a Fairfield Avenue mosque Friday.

"Jesus hates Muslims," they screamed at worshippers arriving at the Masjid An-Noor mosque to prepare for the holy week of Ramadan. One protester shoved a placard at a group of young children leaving the mosque. "Murderers," he shouted.

Police arrived on the scene to separate the groups, but said no arrests were made.

Flip Benham, of Dallas, Texas, organizer of the protest, was yelling at the worshipers with a bullhorn.

"This is a war in America and we are taking it to the mosques around the country," he said.

Muslim leaders in Connecticut are concerned that such protests will only escalate as Ramadan approaches and are now seeking police protection.

As it turns out Benham and his Operation Save America have been protesting Islam and all other religions for years now.  And until recently, OSA was a fringe group advocating an extremist right wing view.

Today, they are advocating that exact same view ... only it has now become the mainstream conservative view. 

Last week it was reported that, on Wednesday, a large group of conservative leaders were going to unveil what they call "definitive statement" regarding the central principles of the conservative movement, to be known as "The Mount Vernon Statement."

And apparently it is a pretty big deal, as it is already getting all sorts of media coverage ... most of which makes it pretty clear that, despite all the hype, this new manifesto is really going to say anything at all: 

The "Mount Vernon Statement,'' to be signed on an Alexandria estate once owned by George Washington, is billed as a declaration of conservative values and beliefs. Organizers say it is modeled after the 1960 Sharon Statement, signed at the Connecticut home of William F. Buckley Jr., which helped usher in the modern conservative movement.

"We don't talk about specific issues or parties or the current political situation,'' said Alfred S. Regnery, publisher of the American Spectator magazine. He helped draft the statement as part of the Conservative Action Project, a new group seeking to coordinate the chorus of voices. "It's a philosophical foundation, based on the concept of constitutional conservatism. It's written so most conservatives can say, 'Yeah, this is just what I think.' "

Ahead of Wednesday's meeting, organizers released only an excerpt of the two-page document. It says in part, "The federal government today ignores the limits of the Constitution, which is increasingly dismissed as obsolete and irrelevant. . . . The change we urgently need, a change consistent with the American ideal, is not movement away from but toward our founding principles.''

The gathering of more than 80 leaders, to be led by Reagan-era attorney general Edwin Meese III, comes as the conservative movement's many strands are joining together in opposition to Obama's policies -- and to moderate Republicans they see as insufficiently conservative. The network of loosely affiliated conservative blogs, radio hosts, "tea party" organizers and D.C. institutions is spreading through new media and increasingly coordinating its message.

The manifesto is scheduled to appear here tomorrow at 3 pm, but already excerpts are being floated:

"In recent decades, America's principles have been undermined and redefined in our culture, our universities and our politics. The self-evident truths of 1776 have been supplanted by the notion that no such truths exist. The federal government today ignores the limits of the Constitution, which is increasingly dismissed as obsolete and irrelevant.

"Some insist that America must change, cast off the old and put on the new. But where would this lead -- forward or backward, up or down? Isn't this idea of change an empty promise or even a dangerous deception?

"The change we urgently need, a change consistent with the American ideal, is not movement away from but toward our founding principles. At this important time, we need a restatement of Constitutional conservatism grounded in the priceless principle of ordered liberty articulated in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

"The conservatism of the Declaration asserts self-evident truths based on the laws of nature and nature's God. It defends life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It traces authority to the consent of the governed. It recognizes man's self-interest but also his capacity for virtue."

Wow.  Groundbreaking.

While I generally don't agree with right-wing direct mail guru Richard Viguerie on anything, I have to say that I think he's on to something when he calls this manifesto little more than embarrassing pablum.

I have to say that it comes as absolutely no surprise that the very first Religious Right activist to call for Judge Vaughan Walker's removal from the Proposition 8 trial is the militantly anti-gay Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel:

Matt Barber, Director of Cultural Affairs with Liberty Counsel, released the following statement today on news that the San Francisco Chronicle has “outed” 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Vaughn Walker as an active practitioner of the homosexual lifestyle.

Judge Walker has presided over California’s Proposition 8 case filed by homosexual extremists who seek to manufacture a constitutional “right” to so-called “same-sex marriage:”

“The revelation that Judge Walker apparently chooses to engage in homosexual conduct, if true, would explain much of his bizarre behavior throughout this trial,” said Barber.

...

“Any decision favoring plaintiffs in this case will be permanently marred and universally viewed as stemming from Judge Walker’s personal biases and alleged lifestyle choices.

"For these reasons, and in the interest of justice, Judge Walker should do the honorable thing and immediately recuse himself.”

I'd actually be interested to know if this is an official Liberty Counsel position or if this is just Barber's position, since the press release doesn't appear anywhere on the Liberty Counsel website and instead was posted on Catholic Online.

In fact, Barber regularly issues press releases which he attributes to Liberty Counsel via Catholic Online, like this one:

“While citing the specter of ‘equal protection,’ the Iowa Supreme Court today has unanimously joined a leftist gaggle of ideologically driven judges in California, Massachusetts and Connecticut, creating, from thin air, a phantom ‘right’ to the ridiculous, oxymoronic and postmodern ‘gay’ marriage counterfeit.

And this one:

“The good news is that even in one of the most liberal States in the Union, Maine, the people have once again rejected the ridiculous and oxymoronic notion of ‘same sex marriage.’ The momentum has again shifted – hopefully for good this time – in favor of protecting legitimate marriage.

"A counterfeit is a counterfeit. An orange is an orange no matter how much you want it to be a turnip. This isn’t about ‘marriage.’ It’s about hurting and broken people desperately seeking affirmation of an objectively deviant lifestyle. One that, even in their heart of hearts, they know to be a dead end. As for the militant ‘No on 1’ homosexual activists? I’m reminded of spoiled children dressing up and playing house, refusing to come in when mom calls for dinner".

And various others.

Are these Matt Barber's personal opinions or are they official Liberty Counsel positions?  If they are the former, then why are they always attributed to Liberty Counsel?  And if they are the latter, why are they never posted on the Liberty Counsel website? 

It's almost as if Liberty Counsel and Barber are trying to have it both ways in allowing Barber to regularly issue offensively anti-gay statements on the organization's behalf while allowing the organization to avoid taking any responsibility for his vehemently anti-gay bigotry. 

Almost a week ago, the Georgia Supreme Court ruled that the children of a Georgia man could not be barred from visitation with their gay father and his partner. Makes sense, right? Well, predictably, Matt Barber vehemently disagreed, arguing that children who are exposed to a gay person will be damaged physically and emotionally:

Barber says there appears to be no consideration for the fact that children are very impressionable and could be harmed from exposure to a homosexual environment.

"Obviously it is not in the best interest of a child to be taken by his father and introduced to a group of people who are engaging in abhorrent sexual behaviors, who are modeling abhorrent sexual behaviors and celebration of that [which is] demonstrably dangerous from a medical, spiritual, and emotional standpoint," said Barber

While I strongly disagree with Barber's claim that it's "dangerous from a medical, spiritual, and emotional standpoint" to have children interact with their loving father, I pose a question to Mr. Barber in light of a video that surfaced today.

The video is of an apparent "gay exorcism" of a 16-year-old boy, carried out by Manifested Glory Ministries, a Connecticut-based church. Throughout the video, the church elders can be heard calling on the "homosexual demons" to get out. The child is violently shaking, on the brink of a seizure, and repeatedly vomits as the elders continue to call on the "homosexual demons" to exit his body.

So, Mr. Barber, which seems to pose more of a threat to a child's "medical, spiritual, and emotional" well-being: Allowing children visitation rights with their gay father, and thus avoiding the struggle of growing up in a single-parent environment, or convincing a child that the way he feels is demonic, thus calling for an exorcism which caused the 16-year-old to repeatedly vomit and convulse?

The Christian Anti-Defamation Commission was quick to provide a rebuttal to the widespread outrage that erupted upon the video's surfacing:

Because the video is being so widely viewed on the internet, homosexual activists have viciously attacked the church. These are the same people who demand tolerance for their sexual sin.

By contrast, we know that homosexuals are allowed to participate in vile Gay Pride Parades and perverted fetish festivals on public property throughout the country. These events often involve criminally lewd and lascivious conduct that take place in the presence of children, yet they go unpunished.

Here's the video, I'll let you decide: