Washington

No, Linda Harvey, Marriage Equality Will Not Make Jesus Get Gay Married

Linda Harvey is not happy with the recent vote in Washington state in favor of marriage equality and she is even less happy with the decision by the state to revise its marriage licenses to add an option for "spouse," in addition to "bride" and "groom," allowing those who are getting married to choose which they prefer. 

In Harvey's eyes, this change undermines the "legitimacy of man-woman marriage" and, even worse, creates confusion about the Christian imagery in which Jesus one day returns to earth to marry his "bride": the church.

Well now, even though truth has not changed; marriage is still, in reality, one man and one woman, the voters' decision prompted health department officials to propose a change in language until enough people objected.  The words "bride" and "groom" were going to be replaced with "spouse A" and "spouse B" or "person A" and "person B" on marriage licenses, according to the original proposal.

That's right; on official marriage documents, the words "bride" and "groom" were going to disappear.  When advocates of homosexual marriage say how would two men or two women being allowed to marry change your marriage, here's one way.  Nonsense like this starts showing up and the legitimacy of man-woman marriage is automatically on defense against pretenders to the throne.

...

Homosexuality, far from being marriage, is always a grave sin in Scripture.

Then, speaking of brides and grooms, there's another Christian concept that illustrates the unchanging standard of man and woman as the model for marriage: in the New Testament, Jesus is referred to several times as the "bridegroom." And when he returns, he will return as a bridegroom seeking his bride: the church, which is the body of all believers, also called the Bride of Christ.  It's a beautiful analogy.

What happens to such a concept in a same-sex marriage?  Does Jesus as bridegroom seek another groom?  No, that would be a twisted and frankly offensive spin on a profound and marvelous concept.

As Christians, we must never accept the idea of same-sex marriage.  It certainly doesn't work as sound Christian doctrine and it will be shown before long not to work as revolutionary secular law either.

Ken Hutcherson is 'Sick and Tired of the Homosexuals Taking Words that God has Given Us'

Pastor Kenneth Hutcherson is blaming leading conservative groups for sidelining him in the unsuccessful campaign to overturn Washington state’s marriage equality, and while speaking to Sandy Rios and Fred Jackson of the American Family Association said that churches who aren’t involved in anti-gay campaigns are “an abomination to God.” Hutcherson also reassured Rios, who predicted that Obama will “bring in gay marriage nationally” and “human misery,” not to feel discouraged and to remember that he is the “gayest guy you know.” “I am sick and tired of the homosexuals taking words that God has given us, I am sick and tired of the homosexual community taking our rainbow,” he said, calling on the “evangeli-fish” in the Religious Right to stop being “irrelevant” and “sissified” in the culture wars.

Rios: Dr. Hutcherson, I know that it’s hard for all of us to fight human discouragement, how could we not be, you know four defeats on the marriage amendments and all the other propositions, plus we know that another Barack Obama four years I think is going to bring in gay marriage nationally and so many other things, huge debt, I think we’re going to see human misery. From a spiritual standpoint, Christians are going to suffer some real persecution, I think. So this human discouragement, there’s human reality that we have to face, but speak to us if you will as a pastor, are you there yet? Are you still filled with discouragement this morning? Are you there yet? Are you ready to speak to us as a pastor?

Hutcherson: I think the first thing we are going to have to do to really be discouraged is to speak to the church. I have been preaching and pushing and talking unity till I am blue in the face and you guys know how black I am in the face. I have continued to look that God is still on the throne, this is not a man’s decision in these elections, there is no way in the world that we should have had the votes that we had. So I am praying that we really get in the face of the church, really get in the face of the conservative leaders, really get in the face of churches. We have major churches out here that did not stand up, did not even raise a finger to defeat this whole thing on same-sex marriage and that is just an abomination to God.



Hutcherson: Don’t forget guys, when you think about pastor Hutcherson out here, think about the gayest guy you know, I am sick and tired of the homosexuals taking words that God has given us, I am sick and tired of the homosexual community taking our rainbow when God gave us that promise that He would not destroy the earth with water again. We have just become irrelevant, we are just sissified, we are evangeli-fish with no spiritual vertebrae and we need to wake up.

Joseph Backholm Thinks Marriage Equality will Fail because it relies on 'Emotional Manipulation'

Celebrating his success in putting Washington’s marriage equality law up to a popular referendum, Joseph Backholm of Preserve Marriage Washington and the Family Policy Institute of Washington once again appeared on The Janet Mefferd Show and told her that he is confident of winning in November because the case for same-sex marriage, he claims, doesn’t rely on logic. Instead, Blackholm said that unlike anti-gay activists, proponents of marriage equality depend on demonizing the opposition and “emotional manipulation” to win support.

Backholm: The narrative on the other side of this issue has basically been, ‘good people support redefining marriage, bad people don’t; you’re a good person, so join us.’ So a bunch of people who—generally we consider ourselves to be kind and thoughtful and ‘live and let live’ kind of people, that’s kind of the American way—and so by virtue of that people just migrate by default to where they perceive the people to be. Their narrative depends entirely upon that, so logical discussions about this subject rarely take place with those folks. But when they happen, the logic behind their argument really does tend to fall apart. It’s also because that is what they depend on so heavily, it’s why I’m supremely confident that in the long term we win this discussion because you can’t rely on emotional manipulation forever.

Steve Pidgeon warns that Marriage Equality will make America a 'Cursed Society'

Today on Family Talk, James Dobson spoke to Republican activist Attorney General candidate Steve Pidgeon about an upcoming vote in Washington state that anti-gay groups hope will repeal the state’s law legalizing same-sex marriage. Pidgeon, a birther conspiracy theorist who has likened same-sex marriage to demon worship, is behind Initiative 1192 [pdf], which “reaffirms the definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman.” Along with I-1192, conservatives are also pushing Referendum 74 that would ask voters to approve or reject the marriage equality law signed in February.

He told Dobson that judges in America are creating “a form of totalitarianism” that “violates the fundamental freedoms of what it means to be an American” in order to “impose” same-sex marriage. However, Washington’s marriage equality law was passed by the state legislature and signed by the governor.

Pidgeon also described same-sex marriage as a “profanity” and an act of “desecrating the temple,” warning that people “must rise up” so America does not become “a cursed society”:

What you have, Dr. Dobson, is you have the oligarchy impressing its will upon the people. This is a form of tyranny, if you will, that even Thomas Jefferson warned us about, saying that when the court imposes its will on the public it’s an oligarchy, it’s a form of totalitarianism, where a few select people believe that their will should be imposed on the rest of us. It’s unconstitutional and more importantly it violates the fundamental freedoms of what it means to be an American to have a couple of select judges tell an entire state, ‘you can’t determine for yourself whether or not you’re going to be righteous in the sight of God or not.’



You know, this business of same-sex marriage is really not about same-sex marriage, Dr. Dobson, I mean it is about desecrating the temple.



You cannot be silent any more, there is a time when you cannot allow such a profanity to walk into the sacred assembly and now is that time.



Now is the time, this is the hour, people are being called, you must rise up and you must speak on behalf of the kingdom. This is the difference between whether or not we will be a blessed society or a cursed society, and it’s not just for you, it’s for your children and your grandchildren. You must stand and speak now.

Anti-Gay Pastor Calls Himself the 'Gayest Guy I Know'

Washington state pastor Ken Hutcherson, who is working with the National Organization for Marriage to repeal his state’s marriage equality law, recently embarked on a campaign to “take back the rainbow” from the gay community. Now, Hutcherson even wants pastors to “come out of the closet” and “shout loud and proud, ‘We are gay!’” As Hutcherson explained in an interview with the Christian Post, it is all part of an effort to retake “hijacked” words, arguing that the word “gay” is inappropriate to describe homosexuals like Dan Savage because there is “nothing gay” about them:

But the fact is, Hutcherson is not a homosexual, nor does the happily married man have a same-sex attraction of any kind. He is however, on a mission to take back words, phrases and symbols he believes groups, such as homosexuals and other liberal organizations have "hijacked" from the American lexicon.

"Seriously, I am the gayest guy I know," Hutcherson reiterated in an interview with The Christian Post.

"My frustration is that some groups have taken words and symbols away from the Church and from society in general. When I say I'm 'gay,' what I mean is that I am happy, that I am joyful and that I love people. That is precisely what a Christian ought to be so in my opinion we just need to be as gay as we can."

"Dan Savage (a pro-gay activist) says he is gay. He's not gay, not anywhere close. Yeah, he may be a homosexual but he certainly doesn't appear to be happy or joyful when he stands up in front of a classroom and uses profane language. Nope, nothing gay about that."

Ken Hutcherson: Anti-Gay Activists Must 'Take Back the Rainbow'

Jennifer Roback Morse of the National Organization for Marriage isn’t the only anti-gay activist seeking to take the symbol of the rainbow back from the “gay lobby,” as Washington state pastor and NOM-ally Kenneth Hutcherson, who is working to overturn the state’s marriage equality law, writes today in WorldNetDaily that it is time to “take back the rainbow for God” and let “the homosexual community find a different religious symbol to commandeer.”

How did we get here? Just when was this symbol liquidated of its meaning? When was the sign pointing to God’s promise intentionally co-opted to point to a certain lifestyle choice? Let’s just say that the homosexual movement has been busy over the last couple of decades and that many of these changes have taken place without so much as a peep from the larger Christian community. Rome’s burning; Nero’s fiddling; and Christians are taking a well-deserved nap.



Yes, let’s take back the rainbow for God. Let the homosexual community find a different religious symbol to commandeer. If they were feeling congenial, perhaps the Muslims would let them borrow their crescent moon. In these desperate economic times, maybe the Wiccans would rent the pentagram to them. I don’t really care. What I want is for the Christian community to wake up, wipe the sleep from their eyes, and realize that they are in a spiritual battle that isn’t going away and has no demilitarized zones. The rainbow is a symbol, but it’s meaning points to the very character of God. So Christians …use this God-given symbol for His glory. Using it won’t make you a homosexual. It won’t make you a New Ager. It won’t make leprechauns real. But it might allow you to get into conversations with people who need to meet the very One Who gave us His promise in the first place.

Washington Anti-Gay Activist Likens Marriage Equality to Bloodletting

Joseph Backholm, the Executive Director of the Family Policy Institute of Washington and the leader of the Preserve Marriage Washington campaign to repeal Washington’s marriage equality law, appeared on The Janet Mefferd Show yesterday where he likened same-sex marriage to the medical practice of bloodletting. Just as bloodletting was once a common practice until it was abandoned for not working, Backholm claimed, so too marriage equality for gays and lesbians will eventually be rejected even in states where it is legal. He went on to argue that the movement for equal rights for gays and lesbians is not comparable to the civil rights movement because, according to Backholm, “today’s argument about the redefinition of marriage would be like the civil rights movement if the civil rights movement was an attempt to have black people be referred to as white people.” 

Backholm: Redefining marriage in this way, saying that there is no difference between men and women, that it’s not important for children to have both a mother and a father, that’s not just bad policy, it’s wrong in the eternal sense. So because it’s untrue, it will ultimately be proven as untrue and we will come around to recognize the error of our ways. We used to believe in bloodletting as good medical practice, culture has embraced a lot of things temporarily until they realized it’s based on things that are not true. This is one of those, it has to be temporary, not just because I want it to be temporary, but because it’s untrue in the eternal sense.

Mefferd: That’s a good way of saying it. They have through their propaganda and the means by which they talk about this issue in the media all the time, won a lot of people over to the cause who aren’t thinking very deeply about it, part of the way they’ve done this is talking about equality and civil rights, trying to equate it with the civil rights struggle of the 1960s. The problem is back in the 1960s when we’re talking about the mistreatment of African Americans, that was something that was wrong to do, in this case we’re talking about legitimizing immoral behavior and calling it marriage. I don’t know how you get around the immorality angle of it unless you just say it straight out, this is immoral behavior, we are not going to legitimize this as a nation.

Backholm: Sure, it’s a very fair argument and there are a lot of people within the church who are moved by that. But when we talk about the civil rights issue, the reason these are different, today’s argument about the redefinition of marriage would be like the civil rights movement if the civil rights movement was an attempt to have black people be referred to as white people.

Pastor Accuses Google, Starbucks and Amazon of 'Doing the Devil's Work' by Supporting Marriage Equality

Pastor Steven Andrew of USA Christian Ministries is leading a boycott of companies which endorsed a marriage equality bill in Washington state, including Google, Starbucks and Amazon, charging them with “working against Jesus and leading people to sin and to possibly go to hell.” Andrew, who previously claimed that “Starbucks hates God” over the company’s backing of gay rights, told the Christian Post that any company that favors marriage equality is “anti-God” and is “doing the devil's work.”

Andrew is currently involved in a boycott against Starbucks after the coffee company began supporting a gay marriage bill proposed in Washington State. He recently added a few others to the list as well, including Nike, Google, Microsoft and Amazon, asking Christians to no longer provide business to those corporations, which he claimed promoted homosexual sin.

For Andrew, his nonviolent protests did have a "biblical warrant." "Boycotting anti-God companies is one way a Christian lives out the First Commandment," the author of Making a Strong Christian Nation, told The Christian Post. "If you love Jesus, you won't give your money to those working against Jesus, our Savior."

He believed that if the stores in Sodom and Gomorrah that openly mocked God were boycotted, they could have possibly been saved. "God calls Christians and churches to not share in the sins of others. To love God is to flee sexual immorality. If we help the wicked, then God's Word says God judges us (2 Chronicles 19:2). God calls Christians to 100 percent love Him and to 100 percent oppose sin."

God also called the United States to have the fear of God as a nation, but complacency with sin did not indicate fear of God, Andrew asserted.

"Ungodly politicians, Starbucks, Nike, Amazon and others are doing the devil's work ... trying to 'change' our Christian laws into non-Christian laws ... Every Christian and church should boycott companies making light of Jesus Christ. It is unwise for a Christian to give their money to those working against Jesus and leading people to sin and to possibly go to hell."

FRC Warns Starbucks Could Wreck the Economy by Supporting Marriage Equality

Family Research Council vice president Rob Schwarzwalder yesterday called for a boycott of Starbucks and warned that the company may be endangering the country’s economic health by supporting marriage equality in Washington. “By supporting a movement that would further vitiate the already weakened family unit,” Schwarzwalder writes, “[Starbucks CEO Howard] Schultz is tacitly but actively advocating the continued erosion of the institution – the two-parent, heterosexual, traditional and complementary family unit – without which no economy or society generally can thrive.”

It’s difficult to see how ensuring that gays and lesbians have the right to marry would “vitiate the already weakened family unit” and consequently damage the economy, as studies show that marriage equality is actually a boon to the economy. Researchers have also found the legalizing same-sex marriage does not impact the divorce rate of married opposite-sex couples. But according to Schwarzwalder, marriage equality has “dangerous implications for individuals, families, and culture.”

My home state of Washington has produced some of America’s leading corporations and entrepreneurs: Microsoft and Bill Gates; the Nordstrom, Boeing and Weyerhaeuser families and their eponymously named companies; the Eddie Bauer sporting goods empire; and the nearly omnipresent Starbucks (almost 11,000 stores worldwide). Starbucks emerged in the 1970s at Seattle’s Pike Place Market. One of my sisters bought me a bag of cocoa powder from this location more than three decades ago; if I still had it, it likely would fetch a nice collector’s price.

For many years, I’ve enjoyed going to Starbucks, becoming acquainted with any number of “baristas” and drinking enough of its variously flavored beverages that “grande” characterizes my waistline as much as the size of a given drink. Even when traveling in the Middle East, the taste of a frappuccino has been a welcome reminder that one can go home again. And I’ve always been glad to go into a place that, in some ways, still reminds me of home (there’s a reason Starbucks’ interiors usually are muted; it’s a Pacific Northwest thing).

With Microsoft and several other major firms, Starbucks last month endorsed the effort of some of the Evergreen State’s leading politicians to enact homosexual “marriage.” Although this initiative passed in the state legislature and was signed into law by departing Gov. Christine Gregoire, it likely will be on the state ballot in November.

What is a bit maddening, given Starbucks’ strident advocacy for the redefinition of marriage, is CEO Howard Schultz’s claim that he is non-political. As he said just a few days ago, ”I have no interest in public office … I have only one interest, and that is I want the country to be on the right track.”



To Schultz’s credit, he authored a pledge, now signed by a fairly large group of CEOs, in which they promise, “I join my fellow concerned Americans in pledging to withhold any further campaign contributions to elected members of Congress and the President until a fair, bipartisan deal is reached that sets our nation on stronger long-term fiscal footing.”

This is admirable, and no doubt motivated by a patriotic desire to see the U.S. once again become the engine of economic growth that, for so many decades, it has been. Yet the key to a strong economy is a strong family – a family composed of a father, a mother, and children. The hard data prove it. By supporting a movement that would further vitiate the already weakened family unit, Schultz is tacitly but actively advocating the continued erosion of the institution – the two-parent, heterosexual, traditional and complementary family unit – without which no economy or society generally can thrive.

Additionally, Schultz’s decrying of divisiveness rings a bit hollow when he plunges his company feet-first into the culture wars. The effort to redefine marriage to include same-sex partners is a radical social innovation, one fraught with dangerous implications for individuals, families, and culture. Claiming to be post-political and then allowing one’s chief corporate spokesperson to say that same-sex “marriage” is “is core to who we are and what we value as a company” are assertions that don’t quite add up.

Rep. Trent Franks Calls Marriage Equality A "Threat To The Nation's Survival"

Today on Washington Watch Weekly with Family Research Council president Tony Perkins, Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) claimed that marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples is “a threat to the nation’s survival.” Franks appeared on Perkins’ radio show to discuss his recent House hearing on “The State of Religious Liberty in the United States,” in which his fellow Republican congressman Steve King of Iowa attacked marriage equality as “an active effort to desecrate a sacrament of the church” that is like the desecration of the Eucharist.

Franks, a zealously anti-gay congressman who even threatened to impeach President Obama over his refusal to defend the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act, told Perkins that marriage should remain a “special right” reserved for opposite-sex couples and that marriage equality “not only is a complete undermining of the principles of family and marriage and the hope of future generations but it completely begins to see our society break down.”

Listen:

Franks: We understand that when we’re granting the rights of marriage, that that’s a special right Tony, that’s something we have suggested is clearly the best possible way to see children raised through the best possible environment to launch the next generation, we believe that with all of our hearts as a society, I think most people understand that. So we’ve set aside this special area of the law that says we’re going to respect traditional marriage of a man and a woman because that is the launching pad of the next generation. Let’s face it; we have made a special exception in the law that gives special consideration and recognition to that.

And when people would come along and blur that distinction and say ‘well that should apply in every way’ it not only is a complete undermining of the principles of family and marriage and the hope of future generations but it completely begins to see our society break down to the extent that that foundational unit of the family that is the hope of survival of this country is diminished to the extent that it literally is a threat to the nation’s survival in the long run.

Rep. Ted Poe: Obama Administration Is "Anti-Religious"

Speaking with Family Research Council president Tony Perkins on Washington Watch last week, Texas Republican Rep. Ted Poe accused President Obama and his administration of promoting policies that are “anti-religious.” Poe and Perkins were discussing with the manufactured controversy over a Texas veteran’s cemetery that prohibits a volunteer group from holding religious services at a funeral if the family does not request it. The New York Times points out that this rule was created in 2007 by the Bush administration, but according to Poe, the policy is actually all Obama’s fault.

As Kyle noted, “To the Religious Right, preventing outside groups from attending funerals and offering prayers at services where they are not wanted or requested is a violation of the religious freedom of the volunteers.” Last month, Poe attacked the cemetery director as “anti-Christian, anti-religion and anti-veteran” and introduced legislation that he said would end the supposed “religious censorship.”

In his conversation with Poe last week, Perkins claimed that “this is symptomatic of a much larger problem that we’re seeing in this administration where this type of hostility, I would describe it as, toward traditional, orthodox religious views is being unleashed.” Poe said that he agreed with Perkins’ assessment and went on to blame the Obama administration for having an “anti-religious” bias.

Perkins: This is symptomatic of a much larger problem that we’re seeing in this administration where this type of hostility, I would describe it as, toward traditional, orthodox religious views is being unleashed. We won this battle but the war is far from over, so you’ve got legislation that will say, ‘hey, nowhere in this country will veterans be denied their rights nor their families to the right to these religious services in federal cemeteries,’ so where does that legislation stand?

Poe: The legislation has been filed and it is before the Veterans Affairs Committee in the House of Representatives. As soon as they get a hearing we’ll get it to the floor as soon as we can and get a vote on it, and I see no reason why it wouldn’t pass. What you say Tony is exactly correct. It is my opinion that the administration—this problem is systematic throughout the administration in areas that it’s just almost anti-religious, non-religious and anti-religious in areas such as this. We’re calling them out on this to stop this nonsense.

Perkins Agrees With Jeffress That Voters Should Prefer Christian Leaders

Coverage of the Family Research Council’s Values Voter Summit this year was dominated by stories of Robert Jeffress’ criticism of the Mormon faith; Bryan Fischer’s unabashed bigotry; and the infighting that rose to the surface when Bill Bennett rebuked Jeffress and Mitt Romney, tepidly and not by name, denounced Fischer. The press coverage of the Religious Right conference was so completely focused on Jeffress and Fischer that the FRC even asked members to pray that the media will stop reporting on the story.

Today FRC president Tony Perkins used his radio alert today to defend Jeffress, who made it clear that Romney’s Mormon faith was a reason he endorsed his chief rival, Rick Perry. “His rational; all else being equal a Christian leader is to be preferred over a non-Christian,” Perkins said, “I whole heartedly agree.”

Listen:

Do you have the freedom to choose between Christian and a non-Christian candidate? Hello, this is Tony Perkins with the Family Research Council in Washington. Texas pastor Robert Jeffress created a firestorm when he declared at the Values Voter Summit he was voting for Rick Perry because he was a Christian. His rational; all else being equal a Christian leader is to be preferred over a non-Christian. I whole heartedly agree. So did the first justice of the Supreme Court John Jay who said it was in the "interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." Many so-called journalists have gone apoplectic claiming such a bigoted position violates article 6 of the Constitution, how absurd. The article reads, “Congress may not require religious tests for an office." The Constitution restricts what the government can require, not what individuals can consider. If voters can consider a candidate's party and that party's platform, they can consider a candidate’s religion and the tenets of that faith. We should prefer mature, qualified Christians for public office over those who reject the orthodox teachings of scripture.

This prompts the question: how would Tony Perkins feel about the competence of a Jewish leader over a Christian one? Perkins and the Religious Right always talk about their Judeo-Christian coalition and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, who is Jewish, addressed the Values Voter Summit and is seen as a rising star in GOP circles. So much for that.

And would it impact Perkins’ decision in the Republican primary? During the Jeffress spat, Perkins told CNN’s John King that he does not consider Mormons to be Christians: “Well, let me say this, John. I do not see Mormonism as the same as Christianity. Now, whether it’s defined as a cult, I don’t know. I would say it’s not Christianity the way evangelicals view Christianity. There’s a distinction. There’s no question there’s a theological distinction between Mormonism and Christianity.”

If Perkins thinks that Christians should be given preference over non-Christians, and that Mormons are not Christians, is there any difference between his view and Jeffress’ view on Romney’s candidacy?

Pat Buchanan Reminisces About The Segregation Era

In an interview yesterday with Janet Mefferd to promote his book Suicide of a Superpower, Pat Buchanan reminisced about the national unity and common culture that existed…during segregation. Buchanan warned that America will soon look like California, where he claims religious faith is obsolete, gangs roam and the English language is marginalized. Buchanan added that America was “created” by whites and lamented that “we will have a country in 2041 that will consist of entirely of minorities.” He went on to say that while segregation was “wrong,” African Americans and whites shared a “common culture” during the segregation era that is now nonexistent.

Listen:

Buchanan: It’s going to be 2041 when white Americans of European descent will be a minority in the country their ancestors created, and what will that mean? I tried to, the article in The Atlantic celebrated it as I said and I tried to take a look at it and I’m more apprehensive because the things that held us all together, even though we’ve had conflicts, racial conflicts and others, were you know a common faith, a common culture, a common history we all loved, literature and poetry, all these things we learned in schools, all of us in the public and parochial schools. This doesn’t exist anymore, all these things are breaking down and we will have a country in 2041 that will consist of entirely of minorities.

And if you take a look at the state of California, for example, where that already exists, you see a state that is de-Christianized, or perhaps the most de-Christianized of the American states, you find that a situation where there’s a black-brown war among the underclass among these gangs which are proliferating and in the prisons. You find a state that is bankrupt or not exactly bankrupt but whose bond-rating is the worst in the United States, who was issuing script. You have something like 23% of the folks there are illiterate and you have half the people in Los Angeles County speaking a language other than English in their own homes. All of America is going to look like this in 2041 and my question is, what holds us together? How do we survive as one nation and one people if we can’t even understand each other?

I grew up in Washington, D.C. when it was 400,000 black folks and 400,000 white folks and segregation was wrong and that existed there, but we had a common religion, a common culture, we read all the same newspapers, we listened to the same radio, we cheered the same ball teams, we read the same history, we celebrated Christmas, Easter, Columbus Day, all the rest of it. And all these things are going out and the problem is once this common ground where you rise above, if you will, diversity that has always been a problem, if you a rise above that to the common ground upon which we can all agree and stand, that’s where you achieve the unity.

Once Upon A Time, Barber Called For The "Repeal Of All State And Federal Hate-Crimes Laws"

Back in 2009, when Congress was working on legislation to expand hate crimes laws to include protections for sexual orientation, the Religious Right pitched a fit and mobilized to try and stop it. 

They failed, but Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel was among the leaders of the movement, going so far as to not only oppose adding sexual orientation to the law but calling for all hate crimes laws to be repealed:

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle — in Washington and around the country — should not only reject S. 909, but should also begin working toward repeal of all state and federal hate-crimes laws.

All violent crimes are "hate crimes." Ever known anyone cracked upside the head in love? There may have been a time when hate-crimes laws were temporarily necessary, but that time has come and gone. When the 1968 federal hate-crimes bill passed, there were multiple and verifiable cases of local prosecutors refusing to indict whites for violent crimes committed against blacks. This was the justification for the law at the time.

We've moved well beyond those days, and FBI statistics bear out that reality. In today's America, every citizen, without fail, is both guaranteed and granted equal protection of the law regardless of race, religion, gender, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, dominant hand, favorite color or "American Idol" pick. This renders all extraneous hate-crimes laws woefully obsolete and fatally discriminatory.

...

Rather than continuing down the wrong path and creating new hate-crimes laws that unfairly favor whichever boutique special-interest group screams the loudest, we should move toward inclusion and equality for all Americans. We should look to the future instead of the past. We should both reject S. 909 and repeal all outdated and discriminatory hate-crimes laws.

After it was signed into law, Barber even participated in a rally protesting the new legislation as unconstitutional ... which is interesting, since today he will be participating in a press conference along with Peter LaBarbera to demand that the act of vandalism against the site hosting their anti-gay training session be treated as a hate crime:

A coalition of ministers and pro-family advocates is questioning the double-standard on "hate crimes" in the wake of an attack Saturday against Christian Liberty Academy (CLA) -- which was threatened with more violence if it continues to host conservative groups like Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH).

...

Americans For Truth President Peter LaBarbera said, "Some in the media are calling this terrorist act 'vandalism,' which we doubt they would do if the situation were reversed and right-wing extremists threw two large bricks through the glass doors of a gay church."

"As conservatives we oppose the concept of 'hate crimes,' but since hate crimes laws are on the books they must be enforced even-handedly," LaBarbera said. “It is scandalous that a left-wing website post taking credit for this act of domestic terrorism -- and threatening more violence -- is still up and running."

Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel said hard-left groups like Gay Liberation Network create a "climate of hate" against Christians by demonizing them with vicious lies that equate the defense of Judeo-Christian morality with "hate."

"We will not compromise on God's truth. Neither will we be terrorized into silence," Barber said.

Klayman Suggests Obama Will Extort Iran For Campaign Money

Judicial Watch founder Larry Klayman yesterday penned a column in Renew America floating the idea that President Obama has so far refused “to take any retaliatory military action” against Iran because he wants the Iranian regime to finance his re-election campaign. Klayman wondered if “the president’s minions,” particularly Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, “are shaking down the radical Islamic leadership in Iran to launder huge campaign contributions into Obama-Democratic Party re-election coffers.” Right-wing activists have previously argued that Obama’s 2008 campaign was financed by Hamas and his reelection bid by China. Klayman writes:

It came as no surprise that this week the Obama Justice Department — obviously to get ahead of the curve since news of an Iranian terrorist plot would have leaked in any event — begrudgingly disclosed that Persian-American "cut outs" of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, with likely full approval of the supreme leader, had planned to line up Mexican drug cartels to assassinate the ambassador of Saudi Arabia and attack its Embassy and the Embassy of Israel in Washington, D.C. If such a plan had actually materialized, this would have amounted to an act of war on American soil. As it was, this brazen act, coupled with President Barack Hussein Obama's failure to take any retaliatory military action, underscores why Israel must now act on its own to take out Iran's nuclear facilities. American resolve to remove the cancer in Tehran simply does not exist.



But is there a method to Obama's madness? As I have hypothesized in earlier columns, can it be that the president's minions — including the mastermind of the Clinton Chinagate scandal in the late 1990s, Hillary Clinton — are shaking down the radical Islamic leadership in Iran to launder huge campaign contributions into Obama-Democratic Party re-election coffers — just as illegal Chinese money helped the Clintons win re-election in 1996? And, since it is increasingly likely that Ms. Hillary will replace Joe Biden as Obama's vice presidential pick in 2012, she has a real interest in using her criminal expertise in illegally laundering foreign money to win these elections. Is this why the United States has all but ignored the growing Iranian nuclear cancer, while actively supporting the overthrow of other regimes in the Middle East — including the formerly pro-American and pro-Israeli Egyptian regime of former President Hosni Mubarak?

And, let's not forget that our corrupt attorney general, Eric Holder, was a principal "bag man" during the Clinton Chinagate scandal years. He assisted then-Attorney General Janet Reno in deep-sixing any meaningful Justice Department investigation of Chinese money laundering. This is discussed in my book "Whores: Why and How I Came to Fight the Establishment."



The bottom line is this, my friends. It's time to take the mullahs out, whatever the cost. Let's pray that the Israelis will now act, as the cowards in our political leadership will not. Is their inaction the result of Tehran's lining their political pockets with laundered campaign contributions, as occurred with Chinagate? I would not be surprised if this were the case, so corrupt is our government!

Hunter Warns That "The Homosexual Lobby" Wants A "Military Takeover"

While speaking today with Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council on his radio show Washington Watch, Congressman Duncan D. Hunter (R-CA) accused “the homosexual lobby” of pushing for a “military takeover by the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender community” at the expense of heterosexual soldiers. Hunter was one of the staunchest opponents of the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, and told Tony Perkins that he predicted such a “takeover.”

Perkins: Let’s talk about this issue here, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, we knew a lot of this was going to happen, you’ve been pressing this issue from the very beginning. But just, I mean, days after this is signed into law, first we had the transvestites wanting to be allowed to come into the military, but now we have chaplains being ordered, or at least given the permission and of course we know what that means it means they’ll be pressured, to do same-sex weddings on military bases. Are they moving faster than you thought they would?

Hunter: No, in fact this is exactly what we knew would happen. We’re not especially clairvoyant, we can’t see into the future, but the homosexual lobby isn’t simply pressing to have equal status in the military with people that are heterosexual. They would like a military takeover by the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender community, and that’s what they’re going to keep pushing for until it happens.

The congressman also didn’t have kind words for the U.S. Navy, contending that they were more supportive of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’s repeal because they were only “involved in the peripheral countries in Africa and Libya” rather than the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan:

Hunter: I think that the Navy particularly has a problem with this because I think they’ve been lost since 9/11, except for the Navy SEALs, they don’t have anybody really that are in this fight that we’ve had in Iraq and Afghanistan directly. They’re more involved in the peripheral countries in Africa and Libya. I think that they were trying to become accepted, frankly, at the highest levels to the administration, and that’s one reason why they pressed forward with the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell so quickly and gave instructions to their chaplains to be able to marry same-sex people, once more in direct contravention of federal law.

Right Wing Author Claims Seth MacFarlane ‚"Hates" God

Washington Times columnist Marybeth Hicks appeared on Eagle Forum Live on Tuesday to promote her new book Don't Let the Kids Drink the Kool-Aid: Confronting the Left's Assault on Our Families, Faith, and Freedom, which is about how progressives are using media and schools to literally “brainwash our kids.” Speaking with host Bill Borst, Hicks criticized the media and the show “Glee” for supposedly negatively portraying Christians.

But Hicks reserved her harshest attacks for “Family Guy” and its creator Seth MacFarlane. Hicks said that MacFarlane, a People For the American Way board member, put God and Jesus “in blasphemous humor situations” and said that she thinks MacFarlane “does believe in God but he hates him”:

Borst: Do you think part of this problem is because they’ve chased God out of our curriculum? They’ve chased him out of our society and in the naked marketplace now?

Hicks: That’s a big chapter in the book, ‘The Left’s Assault Against God,’ and the fight to keep our kids from understanding that first of all the purpose of this nation in large measure is for religious freedom, not to be free of religion, and so that’s a message that they’re trying to hammer home to kids. And here’s how it’s working and this is kind of my point is that all the points of entry into the hearts and minds of our children are really working so strong to send that message. So for example, kids who watch shows on TV like Glee for example, the show Glee that popular show about, you know, the glee club in the school and what not, and on that show there’s a Christian character but she’s often the judgmental, mean one who cuts people off emotionally. Then there’s this show Family Guy, big popular cartoon show, supposed to be an adult cartoon but millions and millions of kids watch the show, and on that show God and Jesus are recurring characters that are put in blasphemous humor situations, God is put in sexual situations. And the creator of that show Seth MacFarlane is not just an atheist he’s an anti-theist and he has said so very openly in media interviews and such. I think he does believe in God but he hates him.

New Religious Right Video: Secularism Means Doom For America

One of the sessions at the recent Values Voter Summit featured a showing of a new half-hour video produced by the American Family Association called “Divorcing God: Secularism and the Republic.” (Back in the summer it was being promoted as "Divorcing God: Secularism, Sexual Anarchy, and the Future of the Republic.") The video features an array of Religious Right leaders and academics, whose argument can be summarized this way:  America, whose greatness is decaying because the country has turned its back on the God who inspired the founding fathers, is doomed if it continues to allow secularists to push religion into the closet.  It's time for Christians to fight back.

And just to be clear, the God in “one nation under God” isn’t any old generic God, but the same Christian God who made western civilization possible.  It’s familiar to anyone who has followed the Religious Right’s “Christian nation” rhetoric, filled with founders’ quotes about religion and  attacks on the Supreme Court’s rulings on church-state separation.

Among the stars of the video is Princeton University’s Robert George, the Religious Right’s favorite intellectual. George, a leader of the National Organization for Marriage, is one of the authors of the Manhattan Declaration, whose signers fancy themselves potential martyrs for opposing abortion and LGBT equality in America. Others include Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute; Michael Farris, homeschooling advocate and chancellor of Patrick Henry College; and Matthew Spalding, of the Heritage Foundation. The founders clearly believed that God punishes nations, says Dacus, and when countries allow their societies to become amoral, there’s a price to be paid, not just by those individuals but society as a whole.  The video suggests that the current fight between secularists and those who want to preserve the country’s divine foundation is the last stand for the future of freedom on planet earth.

Another DVD being handed out at the Values Voter Summit hit similar themes about the importance of the nation’s foundation on biblical principles.  It features a 2010 “State of the Nation” speech delivered by Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis at the Creation Museum in Kentucky.  Ham argues that the nation is threatened by the teaching of evolution and by the Supreme Court. “There really is no such thing as separation of church and state,” says Ham, who warns that “Christianity in this nation is becoming outlawed more and more in various quarters.”  Ham blames the decline more on church leaders than on secularists.  The Bible is the “absolute authority,” he says, but too many Christians have undermined the authority of scripture by compromising on the truth of the 6,000 year-old earth and great flood described in Genesis.  And that means quoting the Bible in policy debates on abortion and gay marriage has lost its effectiveness.

Meanwhile, French scholar Denis Lacorne has just published Religion in America: A Political History (Columbia University Press, 2011), in which he examines two competing narratives about American identity.  One derives from the secular values of the Enlightenment and reflects a desire to preserve liberty by freeing it from the power of an established church.  The second ties American identity to the Puritans and Protestantism.  These two narratives are reflected in competing notions of church-state separation evident today in our politics and on our Supreme Court.  At a presentation at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. this week, Lacorne suggested that what he calls the neopuritan narrative was developed in the first half of the 19th century by historians who wanted to resurrect the influence of the Puritans, who he says were generally ignored by the founding fathers in their debates over religious liberty and whether or not to make the Constitution an explicitly Christian document.  (They chose not to.)

 

Right Wing Round-Up

Values Voter Summit 2011 & America in 2013

As RWW readers know, the Values Voter Summit, the year’s biggest political gathering for the Religious Right, took place in Washington, D.C. this past weekend.  Every Republican presidential candidate with the exception of Jon Huntsman addressed the summit, evidence of the continuing importance of Religious Right activists and political groups to the GOP. Polls suggest that the Religious Right is about twice as big as the Tea Party, with significant overlap between the two movements. Ron Paul’s campaign packed in enough voters to win the straw poll, but it would be wrong to say he was the favorite of the Values Voter crowd. It was up-and-coming candidate Herman Cain who won the loudest cheers (and took second place).

The two days of speeches from presidential candidates, congressional leaders, and Religious Right activists painted a clear picture of where they’ll try to take the country if they are successful in their 2012 electoral goals.  In their America, banks and corporations would be free from pesky consumer and worker protections; there would be no Environmental Protection Agency and no federal support for education; women would have no access to abortion; gays would be second-class citizens; and for at least some of them, religious minorities would have to know their place and be grateful that they are tolerated in this Christian nation. 
 
Here’s a recap of some major themes from the conference.
 
Religious Bigotry on Parade
 
In one of the most extreme expressions of the “Christian nation” approach to government, the American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer has stated repeatedly that the religious liberty of non-Christians is not protected by the First Amendment.  More specifically, he says Mormons are not protected by the First Amendment.  For whatever reason, VVS organizers scheduled Romney and Fischer back-to-back on Saturday morning. 
 
Before the conference, People For the American Way called on Romney to take on Fischer’s bigotry, which he did, albeit in a vague and tepid manner, criticizing “poisonous” rhetoric without naming Fischer or explaining why his views are poison.  Getting greater media attention were comments by Baptist pastor Robert Jeffress, who in his introduction of Texas Gov. Rick Perry insisted on the importance of electing a “genuine” follower of Christ. Reporters who accurately saw this as a swipe at Romney’s faith asked Jeffress about it, and he labeled Mormonism a cult.  (Mormons consider themselves Christians, but many Christians, including Southern Baptists, believe Mormon theology is anything but.)  Following Romney at the microphone, Fischer doubled down, insisting that the next president has to be a Christian “in the mold of” the founding fathers.  Fischer’s inaccurate sense of history is eclipsed only by his lack of respect for church-state separation and for the Constitution itself – even though he insisted that his religious test for the presidency was really a “political test.” Romney took only four percent in the VVS straw poll, even though he has been leading in recent polls of GOP voters.
 
Beating up on Obama
 
Religious Right leaders routinely denounce President Barack Obama, so it is no surprise that a major theme of the VVS was attacking the president and his policies.  Perhaps the nicest thing anyone said about the president was Mitt Romney’s snide remark that Obama is “the conservative movement’s top recruiter.”    Among the nastiest came from virtue-monger Bill Bennett, who said, “if you voted for him last time to prove you are not a racist, you must vote against him this time to prove you are not an idiot.” Rep. Anne Buerkle, one of the Tea Party freshmen, said flat out that the president is not concerned about what is best for the country. 
 
Health care and foreign policy were top policy targets.  Many speakers denounced “Obamacare,” and most of the presidential candidates promised to make dismantling health care reform a top priority. Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, a Religious Right favorite who is leading a legal challenge to the health care reform law, said that if the Supreme Court did not overturn it, Americans would go from being citizens to subjects.  Just about every speaker attacked President Obama for not being strong enough in support of Israel, and repeated a favorite right-wing talking point by pledging to “never apologize” for U.S. actions abroad.
 
Gays as Enemies of Liberty
 
It is clear that a Republican takeover of the Senate and White House would put advances toward equality for LGBT Americans in peril.  Speaker after speaker denounced the recent repeal of the ban on openly gay and lesbian servicemembers in the armed forces; many also attacked marriage equality for same-sex couples.  And many portrayed liberty as a zero-sum game, insisting that advances toward equality posed a dire threat to religious liberty. Rep. Mike Pompeo said “You cannot use our military to promote social ideals that do not reflect the values of our nation,” concluding his remarks with a call for the election of more Republicans, saying “ride to the sounds of the guns and send us more troops.”
Another member of the 2010 freshman class – Rep. Vicky Hartzler – attacked the Obama administration for “trying to use the military to advance their social agenda,” saying, “It’s wrong and it must be stopped.” Predictably, the AFA’s Fischer was the most vitriolic and insisted that the country needs a president “who will treat homosexual behavior not as a political cause at all but as a threat to public health.”
 
Loving Wall Street, Hating Wall Street Protesters
 
On the same day that moving pictures of Kol Nidre services at the site of Occupy Wall Street protests made the rounds on the Internet, Values Voter Summit speakers portrayed the protests as dangerous and violent.  Others simply mocked the protesters without taking seriously the objections being raised to growing inequality and economic hardship in America.  House Majority Leader Eric Cantor denounced the “growing mobs” associated with the protests and decried “the pitting of Americans against Americans.” (Too bad he didn’t stick around to hear the rest of the speakers).  Glenn Beck denounced “Jon Stewart Marxism” and warned that the protests were the sign of an approaching “storm of biblical proportions” in which “the violent left” would smash, tear down, kill, bankrupt, and destroy.  Pundit Laura Ingraham simply made fun of the protesters and held up her own “hug the rich” sign.  Rising star Herman Cain defended Wall Street, blaming the nation’s economic crisis on policymakers, not reckless and irresponsible financiers.  Nobody wanted to regulate the financiers; speakers called for a repeal of the Dodd-Frank law. 
 
A number of speakers promoted Christian Reconstructionist notions of “Biblical economics,” with Star Parker declaring that “this whole notion of redistribution of wealth is inconsistent with scripture” and calling for the selection of a candidate with commitment to the free market according to the Bible.  Ron Paul also insisted “debt is not a political principle.”  The AFA’s Bryan Fischer said that liberalism is based on violating two of the Ten Commandments, namely thou shall not steal, and thou shall not covet anything that belongs to your neighbor.  Liberalism, he said, is “driven by angry, bitter, acquisitive greed for the wealth of productive Americans.” 
 
No Love for Libertarians
 
A major theme at last year’s Values Voter Summit, as at other recent Religious Right political events, was an effort to make social-issue libertarians unwelcome in the conservative movement by insisting that you cannot legitimately claim to be a fiscal conservative if you are not also pushing “traditional family values.”  The same theme was sounded this year by the very first speaker, Tony Perkins.  Another, Joe Carter, took a shot at gay conservatives, saying it was not possible to be conservative and for gay marriage – it simply made you a “liberal who likes tax cuts.”  Carter said “social conservative” should be redundant. Ingraham echoed the theme, calling for an end to conservative modifiers (social, fiscal, national security) and, echoing popular Christian writer C.S. Lewis, called for a commitment to “mere conservatism.”  There were far fewer mentions of the Tea Party movement itself at this year’s VVS, perhaps owing to the movement’s unpopularity – or to the fact that the GOP itself has essentially become one big Tea Party party.
 
Crying Wolf on Religious Persecution
 
Religious Right leaders routinely energize movement activists with dire warnings about threats to religious liberty and the alleged religious persecution of Christians in America.  William Bennett said liberals are bigoted against “people who publicly love their God, who publicly love their country.”  Retired Gen. William Boykin said Christians are facing the greatest persecution ever in America.   The American Center for Law & Justice’s Jay Sekulow warned that the next president will probably select two Supreme Court justices, and that if it isn’t a conservative president, our Judeo-Christian values could be “eliminated.”  Crying wolf about persecution of Christians in America is offensive given the very real suffering of people in countries that do not enjoy religious freedom.  Several speakers addressed the case of a Christian pastor facing death in Iran.  That is persecution; having your political tactics challenged or losing a court case is not.
 
America is Exceptional; Europe Sucks
 
Republican strategists decided a couple of years ago that “American exceptionalism” would be a campaign theme in 2010 and 2012, and we heard plenty of talk about it at the Values Voter Summit.  Among the many who spoke about American exceptionalism was Rep. Steve King, who said “this country was ordained and built by His hand,” that the Declaration of Independence was written with divine guidance, and that God moved the founding fathers around the globe like chess pieces .  Liberals, said the Heritage Foundation’s Matthew Spalding, don’t share a belief in American exceptionalism or the American dream. Many speakers contrasted a freedom-loving, God-fearing America to socialist, post-Christian Europe.  Rick Perry said “those in the White House” don’t believe in American exceptionalism; they’d rather emulate the failed policies of Europe.  Gen. Boykin declared Europe “hopelessly lost.”
 
Smashing the Regulatory State
 
The anti-government, anti-regulatory fervor of billionaire right-wing funders like the Koch brothers was on vibrant display at the VVS.  Without the slightest nod to the fact that regulating the behavior of corporations’ treatment of workers, consumers, and the environment is in any way beneficial, a member of a Heritage Foundation panel said conservatives’ goal should be to “break the back” of the “regulatory state.”  Some presidential candidates vowed to halt every regulation issued during the Obama administration.  Michele Bachmann said her goal was to “dismantle” the bureaucracy.
 
Judging Judges
 
Many speakers criticized judges for upholding abortion rights, church-state separation, and gay rights. Newt Gingrich took these attacks to a whole new level, calling for right-wing politicians to provoke a  constitutional crisis in which the legislative and executive branch would ignore court rulings they didn’t like.  He called the notion of “judicial supremacy” an “affront to the American system of self-government.” Aside from Gingrich’s very dubious constitutional theory, the speech seemed out of place at a conference in which speakers had been calling for the Supreme Court to overturn the health care law passed by Congress and signed into law by President Obama.
 
Deconstructing the ‘Pursuit of Happiness’
 
VVS speakers love quoting the Declaration of Independence, but some are clearly a little troubled with the notion that the “pursuit of happiness” is an inalienable right, one that might apply, for example, to happy, loving gay couples.  Rick Santorum said that the founders’ understanding of “happiness” meant “the morally right thing” and doing what God wants.  Steve King said the  pursuit of happiness was not like a tailgate party, but the pursuit of excellence in moral and spiritual development.  Michele Bachman has equated the pursuit of happiness with private property.
 
Notably weird speeches
 
Mat Staver of the Liberty Counsel gave a meandering address that moved from U.S. policy on Israel to the war on Islamic radicalism to an attack on the United Nations to denunciations of sexologist Alfred Kinsey and humanist/educator John Dewey for undermining western civilization. He warned against conservatives using rhetoric that might push the growing Latino population into the maw of the “leftist machine,” making an aside about Latinos whose names end in “z” having a special connection to Israel.
 
Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, who ended up taking third place in the straw poll, seemed personally hurt that conservative evangelicals weren’t rallying around him given all that he had done for them and the price he had paid for it.  He whined, “Don’t you want a president who’s comfortable in his shoes talking about these issues?”
 
Rep. Steve King of Iowa said that people who support marriage equality or legal abortion don’t do so because they have a value system supporting those things, but because they want to spite the Religious Right – “because they know it’s precious to us.”
 
Former Fox TV personality Glenn Beck gave a trademark lurching speech contrasting visceral anger with his recitation of Abraham Lincoln’s “with malice toward none.” The speech was long on mockery of Wall Street protestors and on the messianic narcissism that was on display at his Lincoln Memorial rally last year.  “We need to give America the same choice” that Moses gave Israel, he said: good or evil, light or dark, life or death, freedom or slavery.  He said America is in a religious war, a race war, a class war, and other wars.  In one breath he insisted that the nation “must return to God” and talked about the “country’s salvation” – and in the next he denounced the notion of “collective salvation,” which he has elsewhere attributed to President Obama and denounced as evil and satanic.
 
Syndicate content