Activism

Why Alveda King Is Perfect For Glenn Beck's Rally

Yesterday I wrote a post noting that Alveda King is claiming that her anti-gay, anti-choice activism is the true legacy of her uncle Martin Luther King's "I Have a Bream" legacy ... but I didn't realize the true extent to which King believes that she alone represents MLK's legacy.

That is something I discovered, along with lots of other interesting things, from this Daniel Denvir profile King in Salon today:

King’s academic credentials have also raised eyebrows. She is regularly referred to as "Dr. Alveda King" in promotional material, although her doctorate is an honorary one, bestowed by St. Anselm College, a Catholic school in Manchester, N.H. And she could not recall why she was awarded the honorary degree.

"I guess for my stand on the support of marriage, and family, and education, and life."

...

In the late 1970s, King was elected to the Georgia state Legislature, where she served two terms as a Democrat -- a period she is not eager to recount.

"I’m not involved in politics anymore," she insisted. "Make sure you note that."

By the mid-1980s, King left office and began work on a romance novel, "Arab Heart." A few years later, she filed a lawsuit against Paramount Pictures, charging that Eddie Murphy stole her plot for his 1988 comedy "Coming to America."

"I gave the manuscript to be read by Eddie Murphy, and he decided to take that and cut me out," she said. "But that’s what happens in the industry."

In 1994, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against King, finding that her self-described "historical tale of romance and adventure" did not have "substantial similarity" to the film, noting that the former was a "serious work with few lighter overtones, whereas 'Coming to America' is a quintessential light romantic comedy."

...

King, who until recently went by Alveda Beal King, has political commitments born of a difficult personal life. She frequently describes the formative role played by her divorces and two abortions, holding tight to her family name even as she became estranged from family.

In 1994, she released a letter condemning Coretta Scott King’s support for abortion and gay rights, saying it would bring "curses on your house and your people...cursing, vexation, rebuke in all that you put your hand to, sickness will come to you and your house, your bloodline will be cut off."

...

Alveda is dismissive of her aunt, who died in 2006, saying, "I've got his DNA. She doesn't, she didn't...Therefore I know something about him. I'm made out of the same stuff."

On a related note, CNSNews.com ran an article today looking at King's claims that her uncle was anti-choice, noting that he had once accepted an award from Planned Parenthood. Of course, King dismisses this fact entirely:

He pointed out that Planned Parenthood, America’s largest abortion provider, awarded the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. its Margaret Sanger Award in 1966, and it highlights King's acceptance of that award on the organization’s Web site.

But Alveda King told CNSNews.com that the award does not prove her uncle supported abortion, and pointed out that Dr. King did not even attend the award ceremony.

“Mrs. Coretta Scott King knew that her husband, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., was pro-life,” she said. “Mrs. Coretta King, who was pro-abortion, took and did read the (acceptance) speech, and accepted on behalf of her husband.”

In her analysis of the acceptance speech, Alveda King concluded -- based on the words spoken by Dr. King in his lifetime -- that the speech, and a subsequent letter thanking Planned Parenthood for the award, were not written by Dr. King.

“He did not write the speech. He did not deliver the speech,” she said. “There was a thank-you letter with what appears to be his signature on it, but he had other people who signed his letters in his office, so you can’t even really say he signed it.”

Basically, Alveda King has been cut off from the King family because she has made a career out of trading on the King name while peddling views that are diametrically opposed to those held by Martin Luther King Jr ... and so it only makes sense that Glenn Beck has tapped her to speak at his rally being held on the anniversary of MLK's "I Have a Dream" speech as Beck tries to claim King's mantle for himself.

LaBarbera: Mehlman Proves Gays Must Be Kept Out of GOP

Speaking of Religious Rigth activists being upset about the fact that Ken Mehlman has come out, you knew it was just a matter of time before Peter LaBarbera weighed in, which he is doing by blasting RNC Chair Michael Steele for saying he is happy for Mehlman and saying that this is proof of why gays must be kept out of the Republican Party:

Why couldn’t Mr. Steele just have kept quiet about this tragic revelation by which another sexually confused man seeks to rationalize his misbehavior (sin) by declaring homosexuality part of his inherent being? Nope, instead, like a three-year-old boy approaching a puddle, Steele just had to step in it. Pro-family writer Laurie Higgins of Illinois Family Institute observed:

So, Steele is “happy” that Mehlman is homosexual and/or happy that he is public about it? Why would he be happy for a friend embracing immoral and dangerous practices or for a friend being public about his embrace of immorality? And why does he respect him for his “difficult” decision to announce his immorality publicly? What fecklessness or cowardice Steele’s comment demonstrates. And this from the leader of the Republican Party…

...

So, we learn that Mehlman used his tremendous influence within the Republican Party to undermine the GOP’s clear platform language in support of preserving traditional marriage. All the while rank-and-file Republican Joes and Janes were assuming that the RNC leader was standing up for marriage between a man and a woman. Mr. Mehlman just proved why homosexual activism should be kept out of the Republican Party: it undermines core conservative values supported overwhelmingly by the GOP grassroots.

Alveda King: Honoring MLK's Dream With Her Anti-Choice Activism

Yesterday, Martin Luther King III wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post taking issue with Glenn Beck's attempts to claim MLK's mantle with his upcoming "Restoring Honor" rally being held at the Lincoln Memorial on the anniversary of King's iconic "I Have a Dream" speech.

Among the scheduled speakers at Beck's rally will be anti-abortion activist Alveda King, MLK's niece.  And she wants it known that she and her anti-abortion agenda are the true heirs to MLK's legacy

"It is absolutely ludicrous that abortion supporters would accuse a blood relative of Dr. King of hijacking the King legacy. Uncle Martin and my father, Rev. A. D. King were blood brothers. How can I hijack something that belongs to me? I am an heir to the King Family legacy," she said. "I have a right to stand at the Lincoln Memorial on the 47th Anniversary of my Uncle's 'I Have A Dream' speech. The Dream has yet to be realized. That Dream is in my genes and I carry forward in the fight for equality and justice for all blacks, including those in the womb. My dad and my uncle gave their lives to ensure that the day would come when blacks would be judged not by the color of their skin, but the content of their character. If they were here, I know they would stand with me in this fight for the lives of those most vulnerable among us," said King.

All For the Glory of Glenn Beck

Politico has a long article about conservatives' concerns about whether Glenn Beck's upcoming rally, and his activism in general, is dedicated to advance conservative ideas or just about advancing Glenn Beck. 

As if there is even a question.

But I wanted to highlight this one section: 

At the request of Beck’s team, which lacked the organizational infrastructure or logistical know-how to pull off Saturday’s march, asked for assistance, Tea Party Patriots agreed to help promote the march among its 500,000 email subscribers and to provide 400 volunteers to staff it, a requirement before the National Park Service would issue a permit.

So Beck asked Tea Party activists for help in organizing and staffing the event but insists that this is not a Tea Party/political event, but rather a solemn religious assembly:

It won’t feel like a Tea Party event. I told people “leave your signs at home.” You will feel the difference, I think, when you first walk out on the mall. I’ve put this at the Lincoln Memorial for a reason. That’s a sacred spot. This isn’t a "rah rah USA!" kind of thing. This is a sacred reflective spot in our nation, you know, the Reflecting Pool. That was done for a reason. I think if you stand between Lincoln and Washington, spiritually, mentally, morally, we will heal our country. I am putting people between Washington and Lincoln physically to try and give them the understanding that these two giants were men just like them. They were American citizens who just did the hard thing, and sometimes doing the hard thing is just doing the right thing. Or more importantly, when nobody notices. And so this is really just to go back to the founding principles.

If you have any doubt that Beck's egomania is rapidly spinning out of control, you really ought to read the entire interview he gave to Townhall in which he repeatedly insists that "there is a revolution coming" and that his 8-28 rally is going to, literally, transform the nation because he, just like the Founding Fathers, is "divinely inspired":

I believe this is the battle between good and evil. If you look at those who live under Shariah law in Iran, the ideas are just more extreme there. It is a clash of people that are rulers, who say they know better and they will force people to do whatever it is and they will destroy those who disagree with them. On a much lesser degree, that’s where we are headed and where it finally ends I don’t know, but is the same root of the same tree of evil. We are battling the oldest battle known to man and it is a spiritual battle that must be won inside of ourselves first.

I learned this from studying the years of 1740-1776, there was an awakening, then an enlightenment, then freedom. If we don’t wake up to the truth of God and the spirit, we are toast.

Glenn Beck's Religious Activism Comes Full Circle

Yesterday I wrote a post about how some Religious Right activists have been growing alarmed by Glenn Beck's subtle transformation from Tea Party leader to religious leader because Beck is a Mormon, citing a recent radio program by Brannon Howse, president and founder of Worldview Weekend, which focused on how Beck has started merging Mormon doctrine with his lessons on American history.

As Julie Ingersoll explained, Howse brought Ed Decker, a former Mormon, on to his program last week to explain the significance behind the theories Beck was promoting on his August 18 show about the history of Native Americans:

[O]n his show on Wednesday, Beck discussed an obscure archeological find, the Bat Creek Stone, that Beck believes has been hidden from the public by the Smithsonian Institution and others because it is evidence of ties between ancient Israel and Native Americans -- which, although Beck did not say this explicitly, would also be evidence for claims (albeit recently disputed within the LDS Church) made in the Book of Mormon. Howse, on his radio show, said he was “stunned” to hear Beck “laying down Mormon teaching” and “when [Beck] started talking about the Bat Creek Stone. . . . I didn’t stay with it, it was just too weird.” (While Howse presented no evidence that Mormons have used the Bat Creek Stone to promote such a view, Beck's use of it was characteristically wacky, as the theory he promoted has long been discredited by archeologists) ... Howse’s guest was Ed Decker, a former Mormon whose apologetics ministry, Saints Alive, focuses on demonstrating the ways in which Mormonism departs from orthodox Christianity. And together they spent nearly an hour denouncing Beck and skewering Mormonism. They even read and ridiculed comments from people on Beck’s website, who indicated that they were Mormon. Decker said Beck has been “using terminology that Mormons manipulate. . . terms that have double meanings . . . and that now he’s getting into things right out of the Book of Mormonism itself.”

Normally, when Beck goes off trying to expose these sorts of conspiracies, most of us are inclined to simply tune him out.  But in this case, that would be a mistake because if you know anything about the importance of Native Americans in Mormon theology, it is blatantly obvious that Beck is now subtly incorporating his religious beliefs into his grand theory of America history:

As Richard and Joan Ostling explain in their book "Mormon America: The Power and the Promise," this unique belief about Native America history is central to the Mormon faith:

The Book of Mormon tells of two ancient seaborne migrations from the Holy Land to the Americas, by Hebrew peoples who are assumed to be ancestors of Native Americans. The older migration, by the Jaredites, occurred after the Tower of Babel incident around 2200 BC, and the later one around 600 BC, just before the Babylonian captivity of the Israelites. In the second, more detailed narrative, Lehi, a descendant of the biblical patriarch Joseph, builds a ship. Guided by a compass, he sails by way of the Indian and Pacific Oceans to the Americans, landing possibly in Central America. Two of Lehi's sons become wicked and rebellious, so God curses them with dark skin. Many American Indians, traditionally called "Lamanites, are supposed to have descended from them. Nephites are the descendants of Lehi's faithful sons.

Ostling made the same point in the PBS documentary "The Mormons":

RICHARD OSTLING: Mormonism teaches that ancient Israelites came to the New World and created scriptures, which we have today as the Book of Mormon, thus Israelites are ancestors of Native Americans. There's a whole story, a very elaborate story of great cities being built. But non-Mormons - and I guess we'd say Mormon skeptics - who have studied these matters do not see evidence. They don't see the DNA that would support the Israelite theory. They don't see evidence of Hebrew language in the New World. They don't see the archeological sites that would show these grand cities that are described.

MICHAEL COE, Archaeologist: According to a lot of Mormon archeologists, their job is to find that this is a true story, that all these things actually existed in this place that is described in the Book of Mormon, which in this case, would have to be in Guatemala and the neighboring Mexican state of Chiapas. And this is what they've been after for 50 years. They've excavated all kinds of sites, and unfortunately, they've never found anything that would back it up.

Clearly, this theory is the foundational premise upon which the Book of Mormon is based and, as Decker explained to Howse, Beck's discussion of the Bat Creek Stone and the "real" history of Native Americans is designed to bolster the idea that "the Jews came to America before Columbus [because] this is the basis of the Book of Mormon ... he's saying that the Smithsonian and many of the scientific agencies of America have lied to the America people and hidden facts from them that prove that the Jews were here before Columbus":

For years now, Beck has been a hero to the Religious Right, but you have to wonder how much longer that will last now that Beck no longer views himself simply as a conservative leader, but as a religous leader and is even using his program to promote Mormon doctrine as American history. 

Update: In the interest of fairness, I want to call attention to this Joanna Brooks piece in which she argues that the role of Native Americans it not, in fact, a "foundational premise" of the Book of Mormon:

If anything, Mormon leaders have been slowly but steadily deemphasizing Native Americans over the last three decades, abandoning the grand discourse once used in the 1970s by Church leaders like Spencer Kimball to describe even contemporary Native peoples as Book of Mormon “Lamanites” with a special history and destiny. That deemphasis has led to mixed feelings and even lasting hurt among some Native peoples, as the recent death of once-prominent Navajo Mormon George P. Lee, who had served as a high-ranking Church leader but was later excommunicated, reminds us.

Ask a 21st-century Mormon what the foundational premise of the Book of Mormon is, and he or she will tell you that they believe the book is scripture because they read it and prayed about it and find reason for hope and deeper faith in its pages. As it is for most contemporary people of faith, personal spiritual experience is the foundational premise of contemporary Mormonism.

My point wasn't that the history of the Native Americas is "foundational" to the beliefs of 21st-century Mormons, but that it was "foundational" to Joseph Smith's own understanding of the Book of Mormon; as Richard Lyman Bushman wrote in "Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling": 

The efforts to situate the Book of Mormon in history, whether ancient or modern, run up against baffling complexities. The Book of Mormon resists conventional analysis, whether sympathetic or critical. Early Mormons themselves had trouble grasping the book's nature. When required to offer a brief summary, they often called it a history of the Indians. Samuel Smith, Joseph's brother, on a tour to win followers in 1830, tried to sell the book as a "history of the origins of the Indians." Joseph himself wrote a newspaper editor in 1833 that "the Book of Mormon is a record of the forefathers of our western Tribes of Indians."

Camenker and MassResistance Push Scott Lively For Governor

Last month we noted that Brian Camenker of MassResistance had been invited to speak at a local Tea Party rally in Massachusetts, only to see the entire rally collapse after other speakers backed out when they learned that he was be participating.

He's been complaining about it ever since and lashing out at the "RINOs" who are trying to keep social conservatives like him out of the movement instead of recognizing the real reason, which is that his organization is listed as an anti-gay hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center

Which makes this new email from MassResistance all the more interesting, as Camenker is urging activists to write in Scott Lively for Governor:

This week we are urging people to write in Scott Lively for Governor, against Charlie Baker.

Scott Lively lives in Springfield and is known as a major pro-family figure not only in the U.S. but internationally. He is an attorney, pastor (with a PhD in theology), pro-family activist, and author of several books. He also spent time as an international consultant on family issues with more than twenty years of ministry opposing the "gay" political agenda around the world.

Dr. Lively is founder of Abiding Truth Ministries, the Pro-Family Law Center, DefendTheFamily.com, and most recently the Redemption Gate Ministry Society in Springfield, Mass.. Over the past 20 years he has also lectured and consulted on pro-family strategies in more than 30 countries.

Like Glenn Beck, Rep. Michele Bachmann, Ron Paul, the Tea Party Movement, MassResistance, and many more, Scott Lively has been demonized by the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) as a "hate group" - a disgusting tactic meant to marginalize effective conservatives. For his beliefs and activism he has withstood pressure that would overcome most people.

Lively is everything that Charlie Baker is not. He is principled, pro-family, pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, pro-2nd-amendment, pro-religion, pro-parents' rights, and utterly fearless.

Send a clear message to the RINO establishment

There's nothing quite like voting for someone you actually support, rather than the lesser of two (or three) evils.

And by thousands (we hope!) of people voting for Scott Lively as a write-in candidate in the September 14 Republican Primary, a very strong statement will be made to the RINO Republican establishment, especially since relatively few people vote in most primaries. Don't assume you own us. What you're selling, we're not buying. The people running the Massachusetts Republican Party love to use social conservatives to do the grunt work on campaigns, but they arrogantly see themselves as above "dirtying" themselves with the principled issues that conservatives care about.

That's right: the head of one Massachusetts based SPLC-certified anti-gay hate group is urging his supporters to support the head of another Massachusetts based SPLC-certified anti-gay hate group for governor. 

In the same email, Camenker brags that he has been invited to speak at a South Boston Tea Party rally at Fort Independence on August 22 with Don Feder and others. 

Unlike the other cowardly Tea Party activists who didn't want anything to do with Camenker, "South Boston Tea Party president Susan Long invites everyone to come and make a statement: If Tea Partiers upset the Left and the political establishment, well -- so be it."

Will they still feel that way about letting Camenker participate when then learn that he wants to see someone like Lively elected Governor? 

Rep. Lamar Smith: No Impeachment of Judge Vaughan Walker

Though the Religious Right was universally outraged by Judge Vaughan Walker's ruling striking down Proposition, only the American Family Association went so far as to demand his immediate impeachment:

Judge Walker's ruling is not "good Behaviour." He has exceeded his constitutional authority and engaged in judicial tyranny.

Judges are not, in fact, unaccountable. They are accountable to Congress, which can remove them from office.

Impeachment proceedings, according to the Constitution, begin in the House of Representatives. It's time for you to put your congressman on record regarding the possible impeachment of Judge Walker.

Yesterday, Rep. Lamar Smith, ranking Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, was the guest on Bryan Fischer's radio program and Fischer wanted to know if they had any plans to try and impeach Walker and Smith told him flat-out that it wasn't going to happen:

Fischer: Judges are in fact accountable to Congress, they have the power of impeachment, they serve only during good behavior. It's my opinion that this is bad behavior. Is there any sense in which the House of Representatives would consider this an impeachable offense for a judge?

Smith: We have done a lot of research on that subject, since I'm the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, the senior Republican on the Judiciary Committee, and quite frankly this doesn't rise to the normal level of impeachment, as much as we might disagree with the opinion. Ultimately, of course, the solution is to elect presidents who will appoint federal judges who do not legislate from the bench and who do not engage in judicial activism. But I do not think that we would be successful in an impeachment move, but it doesn't mean that we can't do something about it by way of a resolution, by way of making elections about these kinds of appointments.

I guess I should point out that Walker was nominated to the federal bench by President Ronald Reagan.

Prop 8: Engle Calls It The End of Democracy While Garlow Warns Of Bestiality

Jim Garlow, pastor of Skyline Wesleyan Church, was a key leader in the effort to pass Proposition 8 and earlier this year explained how he brought Lou Engle in to lead their prayer and fasting effort; an effort which paid off where somewhere between 4:20-4:50 pm on November 1 during TheCall rally in San Diego they felt that "something had snapped in the Heavenlies" and "we knew God had moved":

Garlow's Prop 8 success led Newt Gingrich to tap to him to head his new Renewing American Leadership organization ... and so it is not particularly surprising to see Garlow (and Engle) reacting with alarm to the court decision striking down their handiwork:

"The next court case could conceivably say that if three people wanted to marry or four people or five people or if someone wanted to marry their dog or their horse, they have a right to that because no longer do we have a right to ‘discriminate' based on equal protection," Garlow said.

Proposition 8 advocates argue that same-sex marriage is not ideal for child rearing, but they say it also has serious implications on religious freedom.

"It's a chilling moment," said TheCall founder Lou Engle, who organized a prayer rally in support of Proposition 8 in September 2008. "Democracy is crumbling, and I believe, again, we're going to see the persecution of the church. ... Across the board, religious freedom now is being trumped by gender freedom."

Garlow said in several areas where gay marriage has been legalized, Christians have lost personal and religious liberties. He points to Swedish pastor Ake Green, who was jailed after preaching that homosexuality is a sin, and to a Christian camp in Ocean Grove, N.J., that lost a discrimination lawsuit filed after it refused to allow a lesbian couple to hold a commitment ceremony at its facility.

"If we lose on this one, we lose the capacity to be able to proclaim the gospel as we know it," Garlow said.

And, as we've noted before, Garlow and Engle are planning to dust off their Prop 8 playbook heading into the 2010 midterm elections: 

The case could take years to reach the Supreme Court, but conservative observers believe Wednesday's ruling could impact the upcoming midterm election. Garlow said voters with conservative moral values "are going to rise up and say enough is enough."

He and Engle are encouraging that kind of activism through Pray & Act, an initiative calling for 40 days of prayer and fasting in the run up to Nov. 2. The effort begins Sept. 20 and ends with a webcast event at the Lincoln Memorial Oct. 30.

Garlow said he believes there is a 27-month window to "turn" the nation toward biblical values. "I'm not trying to deadline God, but my sensing is we have a short window left after which it will be too late to see America ever return to any sense of God-honoring truths," he said. "That being the case, prayer and fasting is critical."

Engle, too, is urging prayer and political activism. He believes the timing of TheCall Sacramento, being held Sept. 3-4, is strategic.

"God, in times of crisis, calls for solemn assemblies when there is no hope and there's no remedy," Engle said. "I think this is an incredible opportunity for people to gather from all over America to say: ‘God, we have no recourse ... We are coming to You for help in the time of trouble, to ask forgiveness for treating so lightly marriage in the church.'

"We [will] come together and ask God for some kind of sovereign intervention," he added. "We need to pray for a great awakening."

Right Wing Reactions to Prop 8 Decision

I'll be updating this post as more statements are released reacting to the decision to oveturn Prop 8, but Focus on the Family is out with the first statement blasting the ruling (if you don't count Harry Jackson, who Tweeted a statement hours ago):

“Judge Walker’s ruling raises a shocking notion that a single federal judge can nullify the votes of more than 7 million California voters, binding Supreme Court precedent, and several millennia-worth of evidence that children need both a mom and a dad.

“During these legal proceedings, the millions of California residents who supported Prop 8 have been wrongfully accused of being bigots and haters. Nothing could be further from the truth. Rather, they are concerned citizens, moms and dads who simply wanted to restore to California the long-standing understanding that marriage is between one woman and one man – a common-sense position that was taken away by the actions of another out-of-control state court in May 2008.

“Fortunately for them, who make up the majority of Californians, this disturbing decision is not the last word.

“We fully expect the judge’s decision to be overturned upon appeal. The redeeming feature of our judicial system is that one judge who ignores the law and the evidence must ultimately endure the review and reversal of his actions from the appellate courts.

“We do want Americans to understand the seriousness of this decision, however. If this judge’s decision is not overturned, it will most likely force all 50 states to recognize same-sex marriage. This would be a profound and fundamental change to the social and legal fabric of this country.

“Our Founders intended such radical changes to come from the people, not from activist judges. Alexander Hamilton, in advocating for the ratification of our Constitution in 1788, argued that the judiciary would be ‘the least dangerous’ branch of government. Today’s decision shows how far we have come from that original understanding.”

Randy Thomasson and Save California:

"Natural marriage, voter rights, the Constitution, and our republic called the United States of America have all been dealt a terrible blow. Judge Walker has ignored the written words of the Constitution, which he swore to support and defend and be impartially faithful to, and has instead imposed his own homosexual agenda upon the voters, the parents, and the children of California. This is a blatantly unconstitutional ruling because marriage isn't in the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution guarantees that state policies be by the people, not by the judges, and also supports states' rights, thus making marriage a state jurisdiction. It is high time for the oath of office to be updated to require judicial nominees to swear to judge only according to the written words of the Constitution and the original, documented intent of its framers. As a Californian and an American, I am angry that this biased homosexual judge, in step with other judicial activists, has trampled the written Constitution, grossly misused his authority, and imposed his own agenda, which the Constitution does not allow and which both the people of California and California state authorities should by no means respect."

Concerned Women for America:

Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women for America (CWA), said:

“Judge Walker’s decision goes far beyond homosexual ‘marriage’ to strike at the heart of our representative democracy. Judge Walker has declared, in effect, that his opinion is supreme and ‘We the People’ are no longer free to govern ourselves. The ruling should be appealed and overturned immediately.

“Marriage is not a political toy. It is too important to treat as a means for already powerful people to gain preferred status or acceptance. Marriage between one man and one woman undergirds a stable society and cannot be replaced by any other living arrangement.

“Citizens of California voted to uphold marriage because they understood the sacred nature of marriage and that homosexual activists use same-sex ‘marriage’ as a political juggernaut to indoctrinate young children in schools to reject their parent’s values and to harass, sue and punish people who disagree.

“CWA stands in prayer for our nation as we continue to defend marriage as the holy union God created between one man and one woman.”

CWA of California State Director Phyllis Nemeth said:

“Today Judge Vaughn Walker has chosen to side with political activism over the will of the people. His ruling is slap in the face to the more than seven million Californians who voted to uphold the definition of marriage as it has been understood for millennia.

“While Judge Walker’s decision is disappointing it is not the end of this battle. Far from it. The broad coalition of support for Proposition 8 remains strong, and we will support the appeal by ProtectMarriage.com, the official proponent of Proposition 8.

“We are confident that Judge Walker’s decision will ultimately be reversed. No combination of judicial gymnastics can negate the basic truth that marriage unites the complementary physical and emotional characteristics of a man and a woman to create a oneness that forms the basis for the family unit allowing a child to be raised by his or her father and mother. Any other combination is a counterfeit that fails to provide the best environment for healthy child rearing and a secure foundation for the family. It is this foundation upon which society is – and must be – built for a healthy and sustained existence.”

Family Research Council:

FRC President Tony Perkins released the following statement:

"This lawsuit, should it be upheld on appeal and in the Supreme Court, would become the 'Roe v. Wade' of same-sex 'marriage,' overturning the marriage laws of 45 states. As with abortion, the Supreme Court's involvement would only make the issue more volatile. It's time for the far Left to stop insisting that judges redefine our most fundamental social institution and using liberal courts to obtain a political goal they cannot obtain at the ballot box.

"Marriage is recognized as a public institution, rather than a purely private one, because of its role in bringing together men and women for the reproduction of the human race and keeping them together to raise the children produced by their union. The fact that homosexuals prefer not to enter into marriages as historically defined does not give them a right to change the definition of what a 'marriage' is.

"Marriage as the union between one man and one woman has been the universally-recognized understanding of marriage not only since America's founding but for millennia. To hold that the Founders created a constitutional right that none of them could even have conceived of is, quite simply, wrong.

"FRC has always fought to protect marriage in America and will continue to do so by working with our allies to appeal this dangerous decision. Even if this decision is upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals-the most liberal appeals court in America-Family Research Council is confident that we can help win this case before the U.S. Supreme Court."

Liberty Counsel:

Although Liberty Counsel has defended the marriage laws in California since the battle began in 2004, the Alliance Defense Fund, representing the Prop 8 initiative, opposed Liberty Counsel’s attempt to intervene on behalf of Campaign for California Families. The California Attorney General did not oppose Liberty Counsel’s intervention, but ADF did. Liberty Counsel sought to provide additional defense to Prop 8 because of concern that the case was not being adequately defended. After ADF actively opposed Liberty Counsel, ADF presented only two witnesses at trial, following the 15 witnesses presented by those who challenged the amendment. Even Judge Walker commented that he was concerned by the lack of evidence presented by ADF on behalf of Prop 8. Liberty Counsel will file an amicus brief at the court of appeals in defense of Prop 8.

The California Supreme Court previously stated, “The right of initiative is precious to the people and is one which the courts are zealous to preserve to the fullest tenable measure of spirit as well as letter.” Moreover, the U.S. Constitution cannot be stretched to include a right to same-sex marriage.

Except for this case, since Liberty Counsel was excluded by ADF, Liberty Counsel has represented the Campaign for California Families to defend the state’s marriage laws since 2004 and has argued at the trial, appellate and state Supreme Court levels.

Mary McAlister, Senior Litigation Counsel for Liberty Counsel, commented: “This is a classic case of judicial activism. The Constitution is unrecognizable in this opinion. This is simply the whim of one judge. It does not reflect the Constitution, the rule of law, or the will of the people. I am confident this decision will be overturned.”

Alliance Defense Fund:

“In America, we should respect and uphold the right of a free people to make policy choices through the democratic process--especially ones that do nothing more than uphold the definition of marriage that has existed since the foundation of the country and beyond,” said ADF Senior Counsel Brian Raum.

“We will certainly appeal this disappointing decision. Its impact could be devastating to marriage and the democratic process,” Raum said. “It’s not radical for more than 7 million Californians to protect marriage as they’ve always known it. What would be radical would be to allow a handful of activists to gut the core of the American democratic system and, in addition, force the entire country to accept a system that intentionally denies children the mom and the dad they deserve.”

...

“The majority of California voters simply wished to preserve the historic definition of marriage. The other side’s attack upon their good will and motives is lamentable and preposterous,” Raum said. “Imagine what would happen if every state constitutional amendment could be eliminated by small groups of wealthy activists who malign the intent of the people. It would no longer be America, but a tyranny of elitists.”

“What’s at stake here is bigger than California,” Pugno added. “Americans in numerous states have affirmed--and should be allowed to continue to affirm--a natural and historic public policy position like this. We are prepared to fight all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.”

Capitol Resource Institute:

"Today's ruling is indicative of an out-of-control judiciary willing to circumvent California's direct democracy by imposing their point of view," said Karen England Executive Director of Capitol Resource Institute (CRI). "Family values are under constant assault now more then ever. CRI was instrumental in passing proposition 22 in 2000 and we fought to get proposition 8 on the ballot and subsequently in California's Constitution. We will continue to battle interest groups who wish to redefine one of our oldest institutions; the institution of marriage. We will continue to represent the 7 million Californians who took to the polls in favor of marriage."

American Family Association:

“This is a tyrannical, abusive and utterly unconstitutional display of judicial arrogance. Judge Walker has turned ‘We the People’ into ‘I the Judge.’

“It’s inexcusable for him to deprive the citizens of California of their right to govern themselves, and cavalierly trash the will of over seven million voters. This case never should even have entered his courtroom. The federal constitution nowhere establishes marriage policy, which means under the 10th Amendment that issue is reserved for the states.

“It’s also extremely problematic that Judge Walker is a practicing homosexual himself. He should have recused himself from this case, because his judgment is clearly compromised by his own sexual proclivity. The fundamental issue here is whether homosexual conduct, with all its physical and psychological risks, should be promoted and endorsed by society. That’s why the people and elected officials accountable to the people should be setting marriage policy, not a black-robed tyrant whose own lifestyle choices make it impossible to believe he could be impartial.

“His situation is no different than a judge who owns a porn studio being asked to rule on an anti-pornography statute. He’d have to recuse himself on conflict of interest grounds, and Judge Walker should have done that.

“The Constitution says judges hold office ‘during good Behavior.’ Well, this ruling is bad behavior - in fact, it’s very, very bad behavior - and we call on all members of the House of Representatives who respect the Constitution to launch impeachment proceedings against this judge.”

Traditional Values Coalition:

"It is an outrage that one arrogant and rogue federal judge can take it upon himself to overturn a centuries old definition of marriage and family," said Rev. Lou Sheldon, chairman and founder of Traditional Values Coalition (TVC). "On November 4, 2008, 7 million voters of California cemented into the state constitution a definition of marriage for one man and one woman only. Now with US District Court Judge Vaughn Walker's ruling today he has completely undermined the expressed will of voters at the ballot box. Direct Democracy has been blatantly attacked today."

"First it was the California Supreme Court's decision in 2008 to overturn Prop 22 and force the people of California to accept homosexual marriages. Well, the people adamantly rejected their ruling and homosexual marriages and they passed Prop 8, which was designed to forever tie the hands of judges from redefining marriage. Now one judge has yet again slapped the people in the face, even though the state constitution now clearly tells them what marriage means; we spelled it out for them in black and white," Sheldon added. "This is a blatant sign of judicial activism and lack of judicial restraint."

Sheldon added: "There is more at stake than just traditional marriage and the centuries long definition of the family. This ruling seriously undermines the expressed vote and will of the people on initiatives and proposed amendments they approve at the ballot box. This judge's ruling says that any vote of the people will have no weight, credence, sovereignty, value or worth at all. On appeal, the courts will either realize their limits and not undermine the constitutional power of the vote, or they will continue to demonstrate the most blatant arrogance and impose judicial tyranny by declaring that they alone, and not the people, have the ultimate final say on all matters of the state. Democracy, the constitution and the people would be beneath them."

TVC state lobbyist Benjamin Lopez, who was publicly credited by homosexual State Senator Mark Leno for the defeat of his proposed homosexual marriage bill in 2005, echoed Sheldon's statements:

"The issue at hand now is whether the will of 7 million voters outweighs that of either 7 Supreme Court justices or any one judge anywhere in the state. Homosexual marriage advocates may kick and scream the loudest demanding that Prop 8 be struck down, but they should be drowned out by the deafening voice of 7 million Californians who settled this issue not once, but twice already. We are hear because homosexual radicals continue to act like immature children who throw tantrums when they do not get their way."

"Same-sex marriage supporters repeatedly beat the drum of civil rights to equate their cause to the legitimate struggles of minority groups and say the public is on their side. Yet not even in 'liberal' California have they won over the people so they must resort to sympathetic, liberal black-robed activists who sit on the bench to force same-sex marriage on the people.

"If folks think that the Tea Party movement is a force to be reckoned with now, wait until the silent majority of pro-family voters flex their political muscle once again. Judges beware, you will go the way of Rose Bird, stripped of their robes and kicked off the bench," Lopez added.

The battle of same-sex marriage began in March 2000 when California voters overwhelmingly passed Proposition 22. It stated: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." Homosexual marriage advocates challenged Prop 22 in court and in March 2005, San Francisco Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer struck it down ruling it in violation of the equal protection clause. Kramer's ruling was then challenged all the way to the California Supreme Court. In early 2008 the high court upheld Kramer's ruling allowing homosexual marriages to take place. Voters passed Prop 8 in November 2008 cementing Prop 22's language into the state constitution. After challenges to Prop 8 reached the state supreme court, the justices upheld Prop 8 and allowed for some 18,000 same-sex marriages to stand. The current ruling by Judge Walker was the result of a challenge to the California Supreme Court's ruling.

Richard Land:

 “This is a grievously serious crisis in how the American people will choose to be governed. The people of our most populous state—a state broadly indicative of the nation at large demographically—voted to define marriage as being between one man and one woman, thus excluding same-sex and polygamous relationships from being defined as marriage. 

“Now, an unelected federal judge has chosen to override the will of the people of California and to redefine an institution the federal government did not create and that predates the founding of America. Indeed, ‘marriage’ goes back to the Garden of Eden, where God defined His institution of marriage as being between one man and one woman.

“This case will clearly make its way to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and then to the Supreme Court of the United States, where unfortunately, the outcome is far from certain. There are clearly four votes who will disagree with this judge—Roberts, Thomas, Scalia, and Alito. The supreme question is: Will there be a fifth? Having surveyed Justice Kennedy’s record on this issue, I have no confidence that he will uphold the will of the people of California.

“If and when the Supreme Court agrees with the lower court, then the American people will have to decide whether they will insist on continuing to have a government of the people, by the people and for the people, or whether they’re going to live under the serfdom of government by the judges, of the judges and for the judges. Our forefathers have given us a method to express our ultimate will. It’s called an amendment to the Constitution. If the Supreme Court fails to uphold the will of the people of California—if we are going to have our form of government altered by judicial fiat—then the only alternative left to us is to pass a constitutional amendment defining marriage as being between one man and one woman.

“Many senators who voted against the federal marriage amendment the last time it came up said publicly if a federal court interfered with a state’s right to determine this issue, they would then be willing to vote for a federal marriage amendment. Ladies and gentlemen, prepare to vote.

“Despite egregious court rulings like this one, there is nonetheless an unprecedented effort going on across the nation of Christians uniting for sustained prayer, for revival, awakening and deliverance. I encourage everyone to join me in this effort and go to 4040prayer.com for more information.” 

National Organization for Marriage:

"Big surprise! We expected nothing different from Judge Vaughn Walker, after the biased way he conducted this trial," said Brian Brown, President of NOM. "With a stroke of his pen, Judge Walker has overruled the votes and values of 7 million Californians who voted for marriage as one man and one woman. This ruling, if allowed to stand, threatens not only Prop 8 in California but the laws in 45 other states that define marriage as one man and one woman."

"Never in the history of America has a federal judge ruled that there is a federal constitutional right to same sex marriage. The reason for this is simple - there isn't!" added Brown.

"The 'trial' in San Francisco in the Perry v. Schwarzenegger case is a unique, and disturbing, episode in American jurisprudence. Here we have an openly gay (according to the San Francisco Chronicle) federal judge substituting his views for those of the American people and of our Founding Fathers who I promise you would be shocked by courts that imagine they have the right to put gay marriage in our Constitution. We call on the Supreme Court and Congress to protect the people's right to vote for marriage," stated Maggie Gallagher, Chairman of the Board of NOM.

"Gay marriage groups like the Human Rights Campaign, Freedom to Marry, and Equality California will, no doubt, be congratulating themselves over this "victory" today in San Francisco. However, even they know that Judge Walker's decision is only temporary. For the past 20 years, gay marriage groups have fought to avoid cases filed in federal court for one good reason - they will eventually lose. But these groups do not have control of the Schwarzenegger v. Perry case, which is being litigated by two egomaniacal lawyers (Ted Olson and David Boies). So while they congratulate themselves over their victory before their home-town judge today, let's not lose sight of the fact that this case is headed for the U.S. Supreme Court, where the right of states to define marriage as being between one man and one woman will be affirmed--and if the Supreme Court fails, Congress has the final say. The rights of millions of voters in states from Wisconsin to Florida, from Maine to California, are at stake in this ruling; NOM is confident that the Supreme Court will affirm the basic civil rights of millions of American voters to define marriage as one man and one woman," noted Gallagher.

Robert George - American Principles Project:

“Another flagrant and inexcusable exercise of ‘raw judicial power’ threatens to enflame and prolong the culture war ignited by the courts in the 1973 case of Roe v. Wade,” said Dr. Robert P. George, Founder of the American Principles Project. “In striking down California’s conjugal marriage law, Judge Walker has arrogated to himself a decision of profound social importance—the definition and meaning of marriage itself—that is left by the Constitution to the people and their elected representatives.”

“As a decision lacking any warrant in the text, logic, structure, or original understanding of the Constitution, it abuses and dishonors the very charter in whose name Judge Walker declares to be acting. This usurpation of democratic authority must not be permitted to stand.”

Judge Walker’s decision in Perry v. Schwarzenegger seeks to invalidate California Proposition 8, which by vote of the people of California restored the conjugal conception of marriage as the union of husband and wife after California courts had re-defined marriage to include same-sex partnerships.

“The claim that this case is about equal protection or discrimination is simply false,” George said. “It is about the nature of marriage as an institution that serves the interests of children—and society as a whole—by uniting men and women in a relationship whose meaning is shaped by its wonderful and, indeed, unique aptness for the begetting and rearing of children.

“We are talking about the right to define what marriage is, not about who can or cannot take part. Under our Constitution the definition and meaning of marriage is a decision left in the hands of the people, not given to that small fraction of the population who happen to be judges.”

“Judge Walker has abandoned his role as an impartial umpire and jumped into the competition between those who believe in marriage as the union of husband and wife and those who seek to advance still further the ideology of the sexual revolution. Were his decision to stand, it would ensure additional decades of social dissension and polarization. Pro-marriage Americans are not going to yield to sexual revolutionary ideology or to judges who abandon their impartiality to advance it. We will work as hard as we can for as long as it takes to defend the institution of marriage and to restore the principle of democratic self-government,” concluded Dr. George.

Newt Gingrich:

"Judge Walker's ruling overturning Prop 8 is an outrageous disrespect for our Constitution and for the majority of people of the United States who believe marriage is the union of husband and wife. In every state of the union from California to Maine to Georgia, where the people have had a chance to vote they've affirmed that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. Congress now has the responsibility to act immediately to reaffirm marriage as a union of one man and one woman as our national policy. Today’s notorious decision also underscores the importance of the Senate vote tomorrow on the nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court because judges who oppose the American people are a growing threat to our society.”

The Right Loses It As Kagan's Confirmation Nears

It seems that the closer Elena Kagan gets to being confirmed to the Supreme Court, the weaker the Right's case for opposing her becomes and, as such, the more desperate their campaign becomes.

While Phyllis Schlafly is warning that Kagan is part of President Obama's plan to "break free from our Constitution" and "fundamentally transform America," others, like Robert Knight, are going completely off the rails:

As we watch in disbelief, the United States Senate is about to take the Fifth on a Supreme Court nominee who has no business being near a courtroom except as a defendant.

The word from Capitol Hill is that the GOP won’t even bother with a filibuster despite evidence from Elena Kagan’s Judiciary Committee hearing that she falsified evidence used in a Supreme Court case and committed what might be perjury before that committee.

One wonders what it would take for the Senate to deny this nomination? A daytime bank robbery, guns drawn? No, that could be chalked up to youthful exuberance or perhaps research in pursuit of insight into the criminal mind. When the Gang of 14 Democrats and Republicans agreed to clear the path for some Bush Administration nominees, that arrogant group’s presumption was that a president is entitled to his pick unless there are “exceptional circumstances.”

If Elena Kagan’s malfeasance does not fit “exceptional circumstances,” the term has no meaning.

For the record, the phrase used by the Gang of 14 was "extraordinary circumstances," not "exceptional circumstances."

But Knight has nothing on the Family Research Council, which appears to be on the verge of losing its mind at the prospect of seeing Kagan on the Supreme Court:

In all of American history, only 111 justices have had the privilege of serving on the U.S. Supreme Court. By the end of this week, members of the Senate will have made their decision on the 112th. If it is Elena Kagan, the President's controversial Solicitor General, she will most likely join this elite club with the third fewest confirmation votes of any nominee in history. Outside the Beltway, she is unpopular even with everyday Americans, who are "more convinced than ever" that she is an ideological liberal one goal: to supplant the Constitution with a permanent Obama agenda. "It is all but certain," Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) said, "that, if confirmed, Ms. Kagan will bring to the [Court] a progressive activist judicial philosophy which holds that unelected judges are empowered to set national policy from the bench." Her entire career--from the Clinton administration to Harvard Law School and the Solicitor General's office--is marred by a trail of unprincipled decisions.

Whether it was rewriting a medical group's opinion to promote infanticide or intentionally fixing a case to sink marriage, Kagan has proven that she will always ignore the law if it conflicts with her ultra-Left philosophy (or career goals). She may have zero experience as a judge, but the White House believes that she has plenty where it matters most: in years of pro-abortion, anti-American activism. Like the liberals in Congress, she is on the wrong side of the American people (and the Constitution) on every value we hold dear: the promise of new life, the stability of the family, the valor of our troops, the power of faith, and the significance of speech.

Conservatives Issue Declaration of Tea Party Solidarity

Given that Tea Party activists are, by and large, conservative Republicans, it doesn't come as much of a surprise that conservative Republicans support the Tea Party.

Which is now giving rise to pointlessly absurd things like this declaration of Tea Party solidarity:

Save America...STOP Obama Tyranny National Coalition Chairman Dr. Rick Scarborough announced the successful conclusion of a petition drive: "In Support of The Tea Parties And Against Defamation."

Signers include such notable conservative leaders as Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, Gary Bauer (American Values), Brent Bozell (Media Research Center), Wendy Wright (Concerned Women for America), Richard A. Viguerie (ConservativeHQ.com), Morton Blackwell (Leadership Institute), Alfred S. Regnery (The American Spectator), Gov. Mike Huckabee, Judge Roy Moore, Don Irvine (Accuracy In Media), Tom McClusky (Family Research Council), Herbert I. London (Hudson Institute), Rev. Louis Sheldon (Traditional Values Coalition) and Phyllis Schlafly (Eagle Forum). Organizations listed for identification purposes only.

Scarborough observed: "Conservative leaders lining up behind the Tea Parties -- representing every segment of the movement -- include five rabbis, the Executive Director of Faithful Catholic Citizens and a number of well-respected pastors -- as well as the Executive Director of Gun Owners of America and the Founder of the Second Amendment Foundation. Economic conservatives are represented by Seton Motley (Less Government), Grover Norquist (Americans for Tax Reform), Dick Patten (American Family Business Institute) and Jim Martin (60 Plus Association). Leaders working on defense and foreign policy include Pamela Geller (Atlas Shrugs), Elaine Donnelly (Center for Military Readiness) and Herb Zweibon (Americans for A Safe Israel). Jordan Marks (Young Americans for Freedom) is the executive director of the nation's oldest conservative youth group."

The petition calls the Tea Parties "one of the best hopes for restoring constitutional government," but notes they have been "subjected to an unprecedented campaign of lies, distortion and vitriol, most recently by the NAACP which called on them to 'expel the bigots and racists in your ranks.'"

Scarborough noted these attacks, "magnified by a compliant media," are part of an overall strategy: "The left is running scared. Its president is wildly unpopular. It is now looking at huge loses in the mid-term elections. It hopes that by stigmatizing and marginalizing the Tea Parties -- the most visible symbol of opposition to big government -- it will thereby discredit all opposition to this administration."

The Petition charges that the anti-Tea Party campaign also "represents a cynical attempt to manipulate minority voters and exploit their fear in the upcoming election."

Wow, right-wing activists support right-wing activism? Who would ever have guessed? 

But apparently this was such an important statement that Scarborough managed to get a who's who of right-wing activists to sign on [PDF]. 

Harry Jackson: Fighting Against Gay Marriage is Just Like Fighting For Civil Rights

In his latest column, Bishop Harry Jackson explains why he has been so focused on fighting marriage equality in Washington DC.

First, it is because marriage equality "will create conflict between people who fervently believe in traditional marriage and the law" and people like Jackson will inevitably lose.

But Jackson's primary reason is because his father was once threatened by a racist, Southern cop who sought to prevent him from voting ... which is exactly what politicians and judges in Washington, DC are trying to do to Jackson and company today:

In the early ’50’s my father, a World War II veteran, got involved in the struggle for national voter rights. Blacks were being systematically excluded from the prize right of our constitution - the right to vote.

In 1954, he was threatened at gunpoint by a state trooper in a blood-drenched southern state, who shot a live round just over my father’s head as a threat. He was told that if he did not stop rabble rousing, the next time the trooper would not miss. I was told this story over and over again as the reason my family migrated north to Cincinnati, Ohio and later Washington. Once in Ohio, my father made a pledge that he would remain actively engaged in grassroots politics. Dad was one of tens of thousands of blacks abused, threatened, or treated worse under “the terrorism” of the Jim Crow days.

In many ways, I feel that I am reliving family history. The idea that heavy-handed politicians can still steal the people’s right to vote amazes me. Like my father, I say, “Not on my watch!”

Liberty Counsel Under Attack From "Kaganites" Clones!

Of all the fear-mongering fundraising efforts I have seen from the Religious Right during Elena Kagan's confirmation process, this new email from the Liberty Counsel has got to be among the most absurd.

It starts off like any typical right-wing pitch:

We believe that Elena Kagan is a dangerous, radical activist whose ideologies run counter to virtually everything we hold dear as advocates of pro-family, pro-life and pro-faith values ... [T]here can be no doubt that, if confirmed, she would "Kaganize" the High Court by giving place to her political activism. Even worse, she would implement Barack Obama's dangerous socialist ideologies into law long after he is out of office.

But from there it goes completely off the rails, claiming that the organization needs donations because its budget and resources have been stretched thin not just from fighting the Kagan nomination, but because they have also been forced to fight a veritable army of "Kaganites" who are on a mission to destroy this nation:

Our litigation team has encountered Kagan's former students and colleagues, many of whom now work for the ACLU and other leftist organizations. I frequently come face to face with activists like Elena Kagan in courtrooms and in the media.

We have learned over the years that activists with Kagan's ideology fully intend to destroy the foundations of American faith, family and freedom.

We see firsthand the devastation these "Kaganites" cause in the lives of God-fearing citizens who love the principles upon which this nation was founded and want to lead honest, peaceable lives in a free nation.

Make no mistake, an intentional and strategic assault on our nation's core values of life, liberty and family has been underway for many years now. Today, the assault is being lead by the Obama Administration, its leftist allies, and thousands of radical activists like Elena Kagan. Sadly, many are Kagan's students and protégés who now hold office in our federal government.

Poor Liberty Counsel, all they want is to live honest, peaceable lives ... but they can't because they are constantly under attack by Elena Kagan clones.

Maybe after Janet Porter gets her anti-abortion movie made, she can get to work on turning LC's horror story into her next screenplay.

When Is Judicial Activism Not Judicial Activism? When It Is Directed Against Gays

In 2005, Spain legalized gay marriage and gay adoption.

Two years later, Judge Fernando Ferrin Calamita "ruled in June that a woman must leave her lesbian relationship for the sake of her children or give up custody of them to the father."

His reasoning?

"According to Ferrin, being raised by homosexuals would not allow the children the right to the proper environment to which they were entitled.

“It is understood that (a parent’s) drug addiction, child abuse, prostitution, belonging to a satanic sect or heterosexual affair would negatively affect the children and serve as a reason for a change of custody,” he said. “Well, it’s the same with homosexuality.”

For this open violation of the law, Ferrin was removed from the bench, fined, and ordered to return more than $100,000 in pay ... and has become, in the process, a hero to Bryan Fischer:

If you want a peek into where America's homosexual activists want to take us here in America, look no further than Madrid, Spain, where a prosecutor tried to get Judge Fernando Ferrin Calamita thrown in prison for issuing a pro-family ruling in an adoption case ... His crime was to delay a decision on a lesbian adoption case until he received a report on the impact of the wanna-be lesbian mom on the child.

For exercising his due diligence as a family judge, which, by the way, is his sworn duty, homosexual activists have hounded him out of a job, nearly incarcerated him, and likely bankrupted him ... This serves as warning to the pro-family community in the West. The homosexual lobby is not content simply to win in court. They want to lock us up.

That is right: despite the fact that gay marriage and adoption are legal in Spain, this judge ordered a lesbian mother to either find a man or give up her children ... and now Fischer is hailing him for his refusal to follow the law and is instead portraying him as the victim! 

Something to keep in mind the next time you hear the Religious Right start screaming about "activist judges."

Garlow and Robison Discuss How to Save America Through Fasting, Declaring, Voting, and Protecting Marriage

Yesterday, Jim Garlow, Chairman of Newt Gingrich's Renewing American Leadership and founder of Pray and ACT, was on "Life Today" with James Robsion where he discussed his efforts to mobilize Religious Right activists heading into the election.

In this frist clip, Garlow explains that the core of his "Pray and ACT" effort is to get Christians to fast for forty days heading into the election and to sign onto the Manhattan Declaration, which Robison declares is "as close to being inspired as anything outside the Bible and similar to the Constitution in its authenticity and its authority." But, Garlow explained, praying, fasting, and declaring ones values alone are not enough, as that commitment then has to be transformed into political action:

In this second clip, Garlow explains how the battle for marriage is the single most important battle taking place today because if Christians lose, the Gospel will be silenced and "the enemy" will have succeeded in destroying "the image of God on Earth" because marriage is a terrestrial representation of mankind's ultimate marriage between Jesus and the Church:

Porter Goes Deeper Into Dominionism

Last week we noted that, since losing her radio show due to her growing involvement with Dominion theology, Janet Porter appears to have decided to double down by further aligning herself with those who advocate this theology.

Her initial reaction upon losing her show was to lash out at those who accused her of embracing Dominionism, though without much success as her own words and history undermined her defense.   But months have passed since then and Porter is now seemingly aware that any future she hopes to have in Religious Right activism is going to involve a full-embrace of both Dominionism and its most ardent supporters, which helps explain this:

Just take one guess what the focus of this Worldview Super Conference was:

Sovereignty & Dominion: Biblical Blueprints for Victory!

The Bible tells us in Genesis 1:28 that God created us to multiply, fill the earth, and take dominion of His creation for His Glory. When Jesus came to earth, He gave his disciples the Great Commission and told them to make disciples of all nations, Baptize them, and teach them to obey all that he had commanded (Matthew 28:18-20). These two mandates form the basis for why Christ’s Church exists on this planet. Every square inch of this world belongs to King Jesus. It is our privilege to serve Him by exercising servanthood dominion in every area of life.

And this was not a conference that just happened to have a few Dominionists as speakers, but was rather organized by full-blown Christian Reconstructionists like Gary DeMar of American Vision and Gray North. 

DeMar's mission is to see "an America that recognizes the sovereignty of God over all of life, where Christians apply a Biblical worldview to every facet of society. This future America will be again a 'city on a hill' drawing all nations to the Lord Jesus Christ and teaching them to subdue the earth for the advancement of His Kingdom," while North is the son-in-law of Christian Reconstructionist guru R.J. Rushdoony and likewise an open Reconstructionist himself:

While many Christians believe that biblical law is a guide to morality and public ethics, when interpreted in faith, Reconstructionism is unique in advocating that civil law should be derived from and limited by biblical law. For example, they support the recriminalization of acts of abortion and homosexuality, but also oppose confiscatory taxation, conscription, and most aspects of the welfare state. Protection of property and life needs grounding in biblical law, according to Reconstructionism, or the state set free from the restraint of God's law will take what it wishes at a whim. Accordingly, Reconstructionists advocate biblically derived measures of restitution, a definite limit upon the powers of taxation, and a gold standard or equivalent fixed unit for currency.

While Porter's radio program has gone off the air, her WorldNetDaily column seems to have ben abandoned, and even her Faith2Action website is rarely updated, that doesn't mean Porter has disappeared - she's just abandoned her traditional Religious Right activism in favor of linking up with those openly seeking the creation of a theocracy. 

Behold The Instructors and Curriculum for LaBarbera's 3 Days of Hate Conference

Peter LaBarbera has unveiled the instructor list and official curriculum for his upcoming three day anti-gay hatefest/"truth academy" ... and it is pretty much going to be the gay-hatingest thing you have ever seen: 

Truth Academy Instructors:

  • Matt Barber, Liberty Counsel ; Board Member, AFTAH
  • Cliff Kincaid, America’s Survival; Accuracy in Media
  • Prof. Robert Gagnon, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, author, The Bible and Homosexual Practice
  • Arthur Goldberg, Jews Offering New Alternatives to Homosexuality (JONAH), author, Light in the Closet: Torah, Homosexuality, and the Power to Change
  • Laurie Higgins, Illinois Family Institute
  • Robert Knight, Coral Ridge Ministries; author, Radical Rulers: The White House Elites Who Are Pushing America Towards Socialism, keynote presenter
  • Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality
  • Prof. Rena Lindevaldsen, Liberty University School of Law
  • Greg Quinlan, Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX); Pro-Family Network
  • Ryan Sorba, Young Conservatives of California

THURSDAY 

Welcoming Remarks, Peter LaBarbera, President, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality: “From gay pride to gay tyranny”

10:10 – 11:10 – Prof. Rena Lindevaldsen, Liberty University School of Law: “History of modern ‘gay’ activism and the courts”

11:20-12:20 – Matt Barber, Liberty Counsel; Board Member, AFTAH: “Masculine Christianity: a non-defensive approach to the Culture War over homosexuality”

1:20-2:20 – Ryan Sorba, Young Conservatives of California: “The ‘born gay hoax”

2:30 – 3:30 – Laurie Higgins, Illinois Family Institute: “Using reason and logic in answering pro-homosexuality arguments”

3:40-4:40 – Arthur Goldberg, JONAH (Jews Offering Healthy Alternatives to Homosexuality), author, Light in the Closet: Torah, Homosexuality, and the Power to Change: “Can gays change? Is gay parenting good for kids? Presenting the research on homosexuality”

4:50-6:00 – PANEL DISCUSSION and Q & A:

Theme: “Can the effort to ‘mainstream’ homosexuality in American culture be stopped?”

Panelists: Rena Lindevaldsen, Matt Barber, Laurie Higgins, Ryan Sorba, Arthur Goldberg, and Greg Quinlan, Cliff Kincaid; Moderator: Peter LaBarbera

7:45 – 9:15 – Greg Quinlan, Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX); Pro-Family Network: “An Ex-Gay Christian Discusses Love, Truth and Homosexuality”

FRIDAY

9:00 – 10:00 – Prof. Robert Gagnon, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary: “From abomination to ‘gay’: answering ‘queer theology’ — Old Testament”

10:10 – 11:10 – Prof. Rena Lindevaldsen, Liberty University School of Law: “The zero-sum game: homosexuality-based ‘rights’ vs. religious and First Amendment freedoms”

11:20-12:20 – Laurie Higgins, Illinois Family Institute: “Corrupting children, politicizing schools: the homosexual youth agenda”

1:20-2:20 – Arthur Goldberg, JONAH (Jews Offering New Alternatives to Homosexuality: “The gender confusion agenda: ‘transgender rights’”

2:30 – 3:30 – Cliff Kincaid, America’s Survival, Accuracy in Media: “The battle over blood: ‘gay’ health risks and public policy”

3:40-4:40 – Prof. Rena Lindevaldsen, Liberty U. School of Law: “The legal strategy to stop homosexual ‘marriage’: triumphs and pitfalls”

5:00-6:00 – PANEL DISCUSSION and Q & A:

Theme: “Returning the debate to behavior – getting off the ‘GLBT’ playing field”

Panelists: Rena Lindevaldsen, Matt Barber, Laurie Higgins, Ryan Sorba, Arthur Goldberg, Cliff Kincaid, Robert Knight, Robert Gagnon, Gregg Quinlan; Moderator: Peter LaBarbera

7:45 – 9:15 – Robert Knight, Coral Ridge Ministries; author, Radical Rulers: The White House Elites Who Are Pushing America Towards Socialism: “From destroying DOMA to homosexualizing the military: Obama’s radical homosexual/transsexual agenda for America”

SATURDAY

9:00 – 10:00 – Prof. Robert Gagnon, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary: “’Jesus Never Said Anything about Homosexuality’”; Answering ‘Queer Theology’ — New Testament”

10:10 – 11:10 – Robert Knight, Coral Ridge Ministries: “Destructive legacy: Alfred Kinsey and the (Homo)Sexual Revolution”

11:20-12:20 – Greg Quinlan, PFOX, Pro-Family Network: “The big, pink plan for a lavender culture”/”How to lobby effectively”

1:20-2:20 – Cliff Kincaid, America’s Survival; Accuracy in Media: “Combating pro-homosexual media bias, confronting pro-gay ‘conservatives’”

2:30-3:40 – Prof. Robert Gagnon, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary: “Agreeing with God: a truly biblical approach toward ‘out and proud’ homosexuality”

3:50-4:50 – Ryan Sorba, Young Conservatives of California: “Confronting the zeitgeist: new strategies to turn around younger Americans on ‘gay rights’”

5:00-6:00 – Matt Barber, Liberty Counsel, AFTAH Board Member: “Don’t Ask, Don’t Bleed: stopping Obama’s campaign to homosexualize the U.S. military”

6:00-6:20 – Closing remarks, Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth

Porter Joins Jacobs' DebCo Army of Mothers

Ever since Janet Porter lost her radio program back in May due to her ties to Cindy Jacobs and Dominionism, I have been curious to see how she would ultimately respond:  would she try to distance herself from the likes of Jacobs in hopes of reclaiming her spot as a viable Religious Right leader or would she see Jacobs' brand of prophetic intercession as her best hope for continuing her own activism. 

It has been hard to figure out just what route Porter intends to take, as she has all but disappeared from the scene in the wake of her ouster.  Aside from lashing out a few times at those who exposed her growing reliance on Dominion theology, Porter's activism has been nonexistent ... even her movie plans and blogging don't seem to be going anywhere.

But I think we can get a sense of which direction Porter is heading in based on this:

Wouldn't you know it, but Cindy Jacobs spoke at that same DebCo meeting ... and that is Jacobs is the founder of Deborah Company which is an army of women "willing to mothers of their nations" and wage spiritual warfare against abortion and transform every sector of society: 

God is looking for mothers of nations. Why mothers? They are God’s change agents in the world. Within the heart of every woman, there beats the call to motherhood. It is the very soul of women to want to protect not only their children, but also the future destiny of the land where God planted them.

Motherhood is not only for those who have natural children. It is for those whose heart beats for the rights of the unborn, little babies crying without food, or young children sold into sex trafficking.

The biblical story of Deborah is about just such a woman. She looked around, saw her nation destroyed, and decided to do something about it. Judges 5:7 says, “...village life ceased…until Deborah arose, a mother in Israel.”

Until is an important word in that passage. To put this in the perspective of modern-day Deborahs, we could say, injustice prevailed until the mothers of the nation arose. Poverty ate away at the soul of school children until Deborah. It seems there are great dangers that threaten the life our parents and grandparents fought for in World War II. This is why we need to answer the call to stand on guard for our nations today. The nation was in danger until Deborah arose!

We need these kind of women today—Deborahs, who are willing to be mothers of their nations. It is time to arise.

This is the heart cry of the Deborah Company. All across the globe there is a coalition of women arising who recognize their nation needs them. New chapters are springing up from the Far East to Central Asia to all of Latin America. Europe is waking up to its need for godly women leaders to say, “Enough is enough!"

Julie Anderson and I were in Barcelona, Spain when I had a dramatic visitation from the Lord. I had a vision of women mounting up on horses across the face of the earth to preach the gospel and change their nations. Julie and I were both dressed in armor and had swords in our hands for battle. I believe those swords were symbolic of the battle that we are in for the souls of our nations today.

After this time, the Lord led me to start a new movement to raise up women in leadership across the face of the earth. It is called the Deborah Company or Deb Co. Our mission statement is “Empowering women to bring reformation and transformation in every sector of society, with a special emphasis on women, children, and the poor.”

WND's DJ Dolce Takes the Low Road

Yesterday a couple other sites that monitor the radical right picked up on an offensive old episode of WorldNetDaily’s weird comedy news show “News! News!”. The show’s host, DJ Dolce, clarified to her audience that, while racial slurs are unacceptable, homophobic slurs are perfectly OK:

This is far from DJ Dolce’s only anti-gay moment. In one charming episode, she jokes that anyone who believes gays should have the right to adopt or even babysit children is “walking proof that homosexuality is a mental disorder.” The comedienne frequently manages to work in a homophobic remark or two to augment her already odious comments about liberals, immigrants, and atheists. This morning, for example, Joe.My.God highlighted the comedienne’s rant against Latino immigrants from May, in which she called the boycott against Arizona businesses “the gayest attempt at liberal activism since the coffee party.”

Box Turtle Bulletin’s Timothy Kincaid put his finger on why this is so troubling:

World Net Daily makes no bones about being virulently anti-gay. However, most anti-gays make at least a shallow attempt not to say, “we don’t hate” and try to keep their language – in public – from including the worst slurs.

But it looks like WND has given up all pretenses.

WND has a recurring “comedy” feature called News! News! with D.J. Dolce, WorldNetDaily Exclusive Commentary. Dolce, the wife of Molotov Mitchell, shares her husband’s contempt for gay people. But while he masks his animus in religion (he endorses the death penalty for gay people using Scripture), Dolce just engages in slurs and endorses bigotry.

…It’s been a while since I’ve seen hatred expressed to blatantly in public.

 

Sharron Angle Plays Matchmaker for Tea Party, Religious Right

 

As we’ve noted before, religious right leaders are desperate to jump aboard the Tea Party bandwagon. Now Tea Party backed candidate Sharron Angle is returning the favor, networking with Christian Coalition founder Ralph Reed and attributing her political success to God.

The Tea Party movement is better-known for its alignment with libertarian, anti-Washington sentiment than for its ties to social conservatism. But in an effort to build as broad a coalition as possible in her effort to unseat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), Tea Party favorite Sharron Angle is checking all the boxes.

Over the weekend, Angle participated in an interview with Ralph Reed, the longtime conservative activist, founder of the Christian Coalition, and the man once deemed the "right hand of god" by Time Magazine. And in the course of answering a question about her rise from relative obscurity, the Nevada Republican made a rather bold declaration. Her path to victory, she said, was God's plan.

Syndicate content

Activism Posts Archive

Brian Tashman, Monday 07/11/2011, 1:04pm
Linda Harvey of Mission America is increasingly combining her blistering anti-gay rhetoric with her stringent opposition to the rights of workers and organized labor, targeting a National Education Association affiliate for providing scholarships for LGBT students. Harvey, who last said that “demonic manipulation” was making kids gay, now implies that teachers unions are enticing children to become gay so they can receive money for college. According to Harvey, the union is offering a “financial incentives” for students “to be actively engaged in both the... MORE
Kyle Mantyla, Tuesday 07/05/2011, 4:00pm
It seems that the July issue of Charisma magazine is devoted to the "Church's Gay Dilemma" and nothing better demonstrates this very dilemma than the pair of articles that are running in the issue. One article by Ronald J. Sider, president of Evangelicals for Social Action, while not supportive of marriage equality, wrote a piece arguing that for the church to remain relevant Christians must repent for their bigotry toward gays and get their own houses in order:  First, change the widespread perception that Christians generally, and evangelicals and charismatics in particular... MORE
Brian Tashman, Thursday 06/30/2011, 3:56pm
Mission America’s Linda Harvey, shockingly, is deeply troubled by President Obama’s LGBT Pride Month reception and fears that the push for gay rights will ultimately lead to “anti-family tyranny.” A staunch opponent of LGBT equality, Harvey recently asserted that tolerance of homosexuality caused the housing crisis and that marriage equality exacerbated America’s “perpetual pansexual pagan party.” She argues in her latest radio show that if Obama continues to advocate for gay rights, liberty itself may be at risk: Harvey: Our President has launched... MORE
Kyle Mantyla, Tuesday 06/07/2011, 5:56pm
Michael Keegan @ Huffington Post: Why I Support "The Ronald Reagan Tax Reform Act of 2011." Andy Birkey @ Minnesota Independent: Bradlee Dean takes credit for passing anti-gay marriage amendment. Julie Ingersoll @ Religion Dispatches: The Limits of David Barton’s “Freedom of Religion” Argument. Marie Diamond @ Think Progress: Herman Cain Pledges Not To Sign Any Bill Longer Than Three Pages. Meghan Malloy @ Iowa Independent: Santorum touts anti-abortion activism. MORE
Brian Tashman, Friday 05/13/2011, 3:21pm
Michael Bresciani of American Prophet claims that the move towards gay equality signals the End Days. Writing for Renew America on the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A)’s decision to permit the ordination of gay and lesbian ministers, Bresciani contends “that the rise in gay activism is not only a new low for the nation but it is part and parcel to last day’s prophecy” which “must precede the rise of the antichrist and the final judgments of God against a rebellious and totally reprobate generation.” He also mistakenly believes that Virginia has legalized... MORE
Brian Tashman, Thursday 05/05/2011, 10:54am
Pamela Geller’s rabid anti-Muslim activism helped her win friends in the conservative movement and the Republican Party, and she even had her own panel at CPAC earlier this year. But Geller has now been focusing her efforts on a different issue: Birtherism. Geller accused President Obama of doctoring his birth certificate and took to the Birther website WorldNetDaily to claim that Obama is ineligible to be president because his parents had a sham marriage. Virginia School of Law professor G. Edward White plainly points out that the term “natural born citizen” is “... MORE
Brian Tashman, Wednesday 05/04/2011, 3:20pm
Religious Right and pro-corporate groups failed today to block President Obama’s nominee for U.S. District Court in Rhode Island, John McConnell, from receiving an up-or-down vote in the Senate. The Senate invoked cloture on McConnell’s nomination in a 63-33 vote, defeating the filibuster against McConnell. Filibusters against district court judges are extremely rare—only a handful of District Court nominees have ever faced cloture votes, and none have ever been blocked—and many Republicans previously vowed they would never filibuster a judicial nominee. Today’... MORE