Marriage Equality

CPAC Reject McDonnell Welcomed at Religious Right Prayer Breakfast

Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell was not officially welcomed at this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference, but he was invited to speak at Friday morning’s prayer breakfast hosted by Ralph Reed’s Faith & Freedom Coalition, along with a couple Members of Congress.

Not everybody was happy that McDonnell was on the premises: activists from the National Taxpayers Union and the insanely anti-gay Public Advocate USA gave out anti-McDonnell flyers and stickers to people entering the breakfast.  McDonnell’s sin against CPAC orthodoxy was his support for a transportation plan in Virginia that activists say violates a campaign pledge against raising taxes.  Public Advocate also complained that by praising the General Assembly’s approval of a gay district court nominee, McDonnell “BROKE HIS PLEDGE TO SUPPORT TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE.”

Inside the prayer breakfast, McDonnell (like the Coalition’s Executive Director Gary Marx an alum of Pat Robertson’s Regent University) was introduced by Rep. Randy Forbes and warmly received.  McDonnell gave a talk that was light on conservative red meat and focused on themes of faith and service, urging activists to pray for humility and wisdom.  He did say it is the job of public officials to get things done according to “Judeo-Christian principles.”  And he cited George Washington saying that the nation could not expect “the smiles of heaven” if it abandoned “eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself have ordained.”

Forbes, a leader of the congressional prayer caucus, said our nation’s problem is that God belongs on the throne, we’ve taken Him off, and we need to put Him back up there.  Forbes resorted to a caricature common among Religious Right leaders, complaining about people he said were trying to change the concept of church-state separation to mean that no one in government can speak about their faith and no one in church can talk about the government.

Also speaking was Rep. Tim Huelskamp of Kansas, who invoked a mural of the radical abolitionist John Brown that portrays him with a Bible in one hand, a rifle in the other, and the tornado of the civil war approaching. He called the HHS requirement for insurance coverage of contraception a “tremendous threat” and an attack of religious liberty. “What would John Brown be doing now?” he asked, suggesting that Brown would be on his knees in prayer but also on his feet demanding action from Congress.  Huelskamp complained that his colleagues in Congress are not acting to protect religious liberty, and denounced their “deafening silence” on threats to marriage. Huelskamp has previously complained to Tony Perkins about “the folks on the left that would like to delete, exclude and repeal any religious liberties or any religious values throughout our entire government and our entire society.”

Rachel Campos-Duffy, a conservative activist, author, and Real World: San Francisco alum who is married to Rep. Sean Duffy of Wisconsin, talked about the dangers of churches and families having ceded territory to “an ever-expanding and insatiable government.” For example, Campos said, school breakfast programs for poor students give parents an excuse not to make breakfast for their own kids and just push them out the door rather than talking to them.

Ralph Reed didn’t make the breakfast, but Gary Marx delivered a version of Reed’s post-2012 “it’s not my fault” analysis. Marx ran through statistics on the millions of contacts the Faith & Freedom Coalition made with the 23.3 million evangelical and Catholic voters in its proprietary database, and he said five million more evangelicals voted in 2012 than in 2008, with 78 percent of them voting for Romney. He said the group is actively engaged in this year’s Virginia elections and pledged that 2014 will see the largest mid-term conservative turnout ever.

The breakfast opened with a prayer by Father John De Celles of St. Raymond Penafort Roman Catholic Church in Springfield, Virginia, and closed with a benediction from Rabbi Aryeh Spero of the Caucus for America, who called for a reaffirmation of our “national identity” as a “Judeo-Christian nation” and denounced those who threaten the country from within by trying to "dismantle" that heritage and usurp God’s will.

Footnote: Among the VIP attendees acknowledged from the podium was conservative mega-donor Foster Friess, who backed Rick Santorum’s presidential bid but who has more recently encouraged a more moderate approach to LGBT issues, which he has said is due to his familiarity with gay people, including his brother-in-law and his partner.  There was no mention at the breakfast of news that broke last night about Republican Sen. Rob Portman’s about-face on marriage after his son came out to him. 

FRC to Pastors: Now THIS is an Anti-Gay Sermon!

If the Family Research Council gets its way, evangelical Christians all across America will hear their pastor deliver a sermon written by an FRC official condemning homosexuality and the advance of marriage equality this weekend or next.  On March 26 and 27 the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in cases involving California’s Proposition 8 and the federal Defense of Marriage Act, and this week FRC emailed pastors urging them to hold a “Stand for Marriage Sunday” before then, providing links to a sermon and full-color bulletin insert recapping its main points.

The 4300-word suggested sermon and accompanying power point presentation start with the wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton and march through every Religious Right talking point on homosexuality, marriage equality, and the Satanic, anti-Christian, Nazi-like gay rights movement that is inviting the downfall of civilization. Here are the section heads and some highlights:

Section 1: The Divine Pattern

The sermon says God created men and women to complete each other, and actually includes, “Aren’t you glad God created Adam and Eve, and not just Adam and Steve?” It quotes James Dobson saying “More than ten thousand studies have concluded that kids do best when they are raised by mothers and fathers.” And it asserts that in both the Old and New Testaments, “one man and one woman in a marriage covenant relationship for life is the divine pattern.” (The sermon does not address the abundant inconvenient exceptions to one-man, one-woman marriage in the Bible.)

After reviewing all the ways marriage makes people, couples, and children happier, the section concludes:

God’s way works! Think about it. Every civilization in history is built upon the institution of marriage. It is the foundation. The happiness of couples, the welfare of children, the propagation of the faith, the wellbeing of society, and the orderliness of civilization are all dependent upon the stability of marriage according to the divine pattern. When this God-given pattern is undermined, the whole superstructure of society becomes unstable. Any deviation from the divine pattern invites disaster.

Section 2: The Deceptive Perversion

According to the sermon, homosexuality is a deceptive perversion, a sin that is “open rebellion against the divine pattern.” It cites the familiar “abomination” verses and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Section 3: The Definitive Problem

This section compares gay-rights advocates’ claims that people are born Gay or that “God made us gay” to Nazi propaganda. “They essentially practice Joseph Goebel’s Nazi philosophy of propaganda, which is basically this: Tell a lie long enough and loud enough and eventually most mindless Americans will believe it.” The sermon also compares homosexuality to other “sexual sins” such as promiscuity, adultery and pedophilia. “I do not believe,” it says, “that God would not place in your genetic code something that would damn your immortal soul.” [sic on the double negative]

Section 4: The Destructive Program

This section recounts the dangers of the “radical homosexual agenda,” its goal of “silencing critics in the clergy and Christian media,” and its conquest of the entertainment, educational, and legal arenas, citing a litany of familiar Religious Right horror stories about the alleged persecution of Christians who stand against the merciless gay rights steamroller.  And it pushes one of the primary talking points of Religious Right leaders and their conservative Catholic allies: that equality and religious liberty are fundamentally incompatible:

Where homosexual activists win legal approval, whether by court action or legislation, they often deny our full rights as Christians because a homosexual’s so-called “civil rights” and a Christian’s freedom of conscience and speech opposing homosexuality are mutually exclusive.

“Listen,” the sermon warns, “homosexual activists won’t stop at recognition, their aim is domination. They will not stop until they win over our children and our convicting voice is silenced.”

Section 5: The Determined Plan

These are the action steps FRC wants people hearing the sermon to take:

Action Step 1: Pray

The sermon calls on people to pray for spiritual revival and for “God’s mercy on a nation that is speeding toward Sodom, and hurtling toward Gomorrah.”

Action Step 2: Practice

This section says Christians give up their credibility to challenge the culture when their divorce rate is the same as everyone else’s, and urges people to follow biblical instructions on marriage and home life.

Action Step 3: Participate

This section is a direct rebuke to people who think politics are of the world, something Christians should stay out of. “Since God created the institution of government, would He want His people to stay out of it? No. If Christians don’t ‘render to Caesar’ (Matt. 22:21) and don’t function as ‘salt’ and ‘light’ (Matt. 5:13-16) in the arena of government, then we disobey the commands of Christ and allow Satan to prevail by default.”  The sermon urges people to write blog posts, use Facebook and Twitter, comment on news stories, knock on doors, contact elected officials, and join the March for Marriage being organized by the National Organization for Marriage and its allies in Washington DC on March 26.

Action Step 4: Proclaim

This section urges people to tell those in the “homosexual lifestyle” that they do not have to remain “slaves to sin” but can pray away the gay.

Let’s stand along these poor misguided and lost people trapped in Satan’s snare. Let’s love them out of that sinful and destructive lifestyle! ... But let’s also exercise our rights as Christian citizens! Listen, we can make the difference. Together, Christians all across America can protect and preserve marriage for our children and our children’s children. Let’s stand for God’s plan for marriage because our future depends on it. And all of God’s people said: Amen!

Southern Baptist Convention Poll More Bad News for Anti-Gay Activists

The Southern Baptist Convention’s polling arm LifeWay is out with a new poll revealing widespread support for gay rights, particularly among young people. According to the survey, a clear majority of Americans believe that “homosexuality is a civil rights issue like gender, race and age,” agree that same-sex marriage is “inevitable” and oppose employment discrimination against gays and lesbians.

The denomination is a fierce critic of marriage equality and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, and last year passed a resolution “opposing the idea that gay rights are the same as civil rights.”

Richard Land, the denomination’s top political spokesman, has claimed that the Devil is behind homosexuality and warned that gay rights will lead to divine judgment and “paganization.” While the SBC believes it is wrong to consider gay rights a civil rights issues, Land compared his own anti-gay activism to Martin Luther King Jr.’s leadership of the Civil Rights Movement.

Key findings from the poll include:

  • 64 percent of those polled agreed “it is inevitable that same-sex marriage will become legal throughout the United States.”
  • “80 percent of Americans disagree that employers should be allowed to refuse employment to someone based on their sexual preference.”
  • 58 percent of respondents agreed with the question: “like age, race, and gender, homosexuality is a civil rights issue.”
  • A majority of Americans believe rental halls and landlords should not be allowed to discriminate against same-sex couples.
  • “More Americans do not believe homosexual behavior is a sin than those who believe it is a sin.”

The poll also found that women, young people and people with college degrees were more likely to favor gay rights.

LifeWay’s survey appears to line up with a new bipartisan analysis of exit polls which found that opposition to marriage equality is concentrated among the elderly, white evangelical Christians and people without college degrees.

Wildmon: Overturning DOMA and Prop 8 May Lead to Hate Speech Laws

During the debate over the Shepard-Byrd Hate Crimes Prevention Act, Religious Right groups like the American Family Association warned that the law would “criminalize negative comments concerning homosexuality” and “take away our religious freedoms.”

Of course, none of that happened, but that hasn’t stopped anti-gay activists from making the exact same false claims again and hoping more people will fall for it.

Yesterday, AFA president Tim Wildmon appeared on The Janet Mefferd Show and alleged that if the Supreme Court overturned Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) then we will see “persecution against Christians” and restrictions on the freedom of speech.

Wildmon: You’re headed down the road of persecution against Christians who believe in the Bible as their standard for moral behavior. In Canada now they have different rules there where you can’t even criminalize the lifestyle itself or you’ll be charged with a hate crime. You know that’s the road we’re headed down if these laws, if DOMA is struck down, if Prop 8 is struck down, then you’re headed for control of speech, even if it’s religious speech.

Ironically, the AFA’s own legal counsel, Pat Vaughn, admitted that “the Defense of Marriage Act is probably unconstitutional.”

LaBarbera: 'How Do Two Guys Consummate Their Marriage? Yuck.'

Americans For Truth About Homosexuality president Peter LaBarbera appeared on The Janet Mefferd Show yesterday to discuss the prospects of the Illinois marriage equality bill, or as he called it, “homosexual so-called marriage.” LaBarbera argued that same-sex couples cannot truly be married because they can never consummate the marriage: “If you want to just think of how wrong homosexual so-called marriage is just ask yourself: how do two guys consummate their marriage? Yuck.”

Later, he lamented that soon gay and lesbian teachers may be able to talk about their marriages in school just as a “normal heterosexual married person could.”

LaBarbera: If you want to just think of how wrong homosexual so-called marriage is just ask yourself: how do two guys consummate their marriage? Yuck.

Mefferd: I’m sure they don’t like that question, Peter.

LaBarbera: Yes, they don’t like it and it’s because it’s absurd. The whole concept is absurd. It’s not marriage. You know one angle that I’m going to be writing about Janet is if you’ve got homosexual so-called marriage legalized you’re going to end up teaching gay sex-ed, there is no way around it.



LaBarbera: I believe it was on NPR in Boston after homosexual so-called marriage was legalized there, or forced by the courts, one I believe it was a teacher who said she was emboldened to talk more frankly about homosexuality in the schools in Massachusetts. Think about it, if a teacher is so-called married, say a guy, a male teacher is married to another man, so-called because of course it’s not really marriage, he gets to talk about that marriage in the classroom just as a normal heterosexual married person could talk about — you know a man could talk about his wife.

Harry Jackson: 'Absurd' to Think 'Homosexuals Are Being Denied Equal Protection'

Harry Jackson is out with a column today accusing gay rights supporters of seeking “to hijack not only the moral authority of the Civil Rights Movement, but also the legal arguments which liberated minorities from centuries of legalized oppression and discrimination.” He specifically takes issue with the fact that marriage equality supporters cite the Fourteenth Amendment and Loving v. Virginia, which found anti-miscegenation laws to be unconstitutional.

Jackson explains that same-sex couples don’t have a right to marry because “‘marriage’ means what it has always meant in America: the union of one man and one woman,” and cites a Nevada ruling which argued that marriage laws aren’t discriminatory because a gay person has the right to marry someone of the opposite sex.

Ironically, those two arguments were exactly those used by supporters of laws banning interracial marriage.

Peggy Pascoe in “What Comes Naturally: Miscegenation Law and the Making of Race in America” writes that up until the 1960s white society and the white-dominated legal system “believe[d] that the interracial marriage was unnatural” and “assumed that the marriage of one White man to one White woman was the only kind of marriage worthy of the name.”

Not only did they not consider interracial marriage to be a “marriage,” but they also argued that anti-miscegenation laws were not discriminatory because they applied to people of every race and did not target one race in particular.

Despite this history about marriage laws, Jackson concludes his column by insisting that “the notion that homosexuals are being denied equal protection under the law becomes absurd.”

From the very beginning, homosexual “marriage” activists have sought to hijack not only the moral authority of the Civil Rights Movement, but also the legal arguments which liberated minorities from centuries of legalized oppression and discrimination.

After decades of aggressive activism, the common sense understanding of marriage has become almost hopelessly mired in incomprehensible legal terminology. It becomes difficult for everyday observers to navigate the convoluted logic homosexual activists employ as they attempt to remake one of civilization’s oldest institutions. The argument that redefining marriage to include homosexual couples is only “fair” rests on a specious interpretation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The clause reads as follows:

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

As most of us know, the Fourteenth Amendment was enacted just before the end of the Civil War in response to the Black Codes of the South. The Black Codes were various state laws which, among other things, prevented blacks from owning property and imposed harsher penalties for crimes on blacks than on whites. The Fourteenth Amendment clarified that these laws were unconstitutional, and that the government was obligated to protect the rights of all citizens equally.

So what about the “right” to marry? Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) activists argue that the state is abridging their privileges, often citing Chief Justice Earl Warren’s words in Loving v. Virginia, the 1967 decision that overturned state bans on interracial marriage: “The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.”

I agree with Justice Warren that marriage is a central ingredient in the pursuit of happiness. I disagree with LGBT activists about what “marriage” is. And it is very hard to have a reasonable or productive discussion when the two sides cannot agree on the definition of a central term. You and I may agree that it should be legal to walk a dog in a particular public park. But you may think that the term “dog” includes only domesticated members of the Canis lupus familiaris species, and I may think that the term “dog” can include large gray wolves. You may argue that “dog” should be defined by the laws and traditions that have governed dog ownership for generations, and I may feel that such an approach in unfair to people who want to walk wolves in the park. The point is that we cannot get anywhere until we agree on what a “dog” is.

Homosexuals are not being denied “marriage” rights any more than wolf enthusiasts are being denied dog-ownership rights. Last November, a federal appeals court in Nevada pointed out homosexuals are not, in fact, being denied the right to marry, as the term “marriage” has been long understood. A lesbian couple had sued the state, seeking to overturn Nevada’s ban on gay marriage under the Fourteenth Amendment. Wrote Judge Robert Jones:

Like heterosexual persons, they [homosexuals] may not marry members of the same sex. A homosexual man may marry anyone a heterosexual man may marry, and a homosexual woman may marry anyone a heterosexual woman may marry.

Judge Jones went on to point out that homosexuals have little cause to identify with historically oppressed minorities in the United States, observing that, “Homosexuals have not historically been denied the right to vote, the right to serve on juries, or the right to own property.” Judge Jones starts with the assumption, as we all should, that “marriage” means what it has always meant in America: the union of one man and one woman. If we begin with that reality, the notion that homosexuals are being denied equal protection under the law becomes absurd.

CWA: Marriage Equality 'Will Mean the Destruction of Freedom and Liberty'

Mario Diaz of Concerned Women for America promoted the upcoming Marriage March by warning that gay rights advocates seek to “silence” opponents and that marriage equality “will mean the destruction of freedom and liberty.”

We want people who love God and His principles and who are aware of what the attack on traditional marriage will do to come out and stand up for marriage and for God’s principles and to send a message to the Supreme Court and to other people that we will not be silenced because that is the intent and the strategy of the other side to silence those of us who stand up for the traditional view of marriage.



With truth on our side we most definitely can make sure that our children’s future is protected, God can do it. I know that conventional wisdom says out there that we are losing this fight and there is no use in fighting anymore but we don’t have that luxury. We believe that the destruction of this institution established by God will mean the destruction of freedom and liberty. We must stand and we will on March 26, we hope you can be here with us.

Turek: Ban Gay Marriage Because We Can't All Be Police Officers

The fervently anti-gay writer Frank Turek takes to Townhall today to present an interesting analogy. Turke argues that when gays and lesbians advocate for marriage equality, they are being just as unreasonable as someone who “can’t qualify to become a police officer” protesting “when the government pays other people to be police officers.” He goes on to say that gays and lesbians can “simply marry someone of the opposite sex” and that the legalization of same-sex marriage will harm children and cause Americans to “lose the freedom of speech.”

Of course, the argument that gays and lesbians already have marriage equality because they could just marry a person of a different gender was the same claim made by supporters of anti-miscegenation laws who asserted that interracial marriage was unnatural and that people already have the same right to marry someone of their race.

Here’s why promoting natural marriage exclusively does not deny anyone equal rights.

First, everyone has the same equal right to marry a qualified person of the opposite sex. That law treats every man and woman equally, but not every behavior they may desire equally. Same sex marriage and natural marriage are different behaviors with different outcomes, so the law rightfully treats them differently. One behavior perpetuates and stabilizes society, and the other doesn’t. Promoting one behavior does not deny rights to people who don’t engage in that behavior.

An analogy may help clarify this point. Like marriage, the government promotes police work by paying people to become police officers because police do much good for society. But if you can’t qualify to become a police officer, or if you choose another vocation, your rights are not being violated when the government pays other people to be police officers. All people, regardless of their vocation, experience the benefits of police, just like all people, regardless of their marriage status, experience the benefits of natural marriage.



Some will ignore those biological realities and object, “But men and women are the same so there’s no difference between homosexual and heterosexual relationships!” If that were true, no one would be arguing for same-sex marriage. The very fact people demand same-sex marriage is precisely because they know men and women are drastically different. If men and women were the same, no one would be spending time and energy trying to get same-sex marriage approved. They would simply marry someone of the opposite sex—which according to them is the same as someone of the same sex—and be done with it.



Now, I am not suggesting that a law would fully achieve either, but only to point out that natural and same-sex marriage should not be legally or culturally equated. The truth is homosexual and heterosexual relationships are not the same, can never be the same, and will never yield the same benefits to individuals or society. We hurt everyone, especially children, by pretending otherwise.

Finally, as jurisdictions with same-sex marriage show us, people lose their freedoms of speech, association, religion and even parenting due to the imposition of same-sex marriage. In Massachusetts, for example, parents now have no right to even know when their kids as young as kindergarten are being taught about homosexuality, much less opt out of it; business owners must now provide benefits to same-sex couples, and they can be fined for declining to provide services at homosexual weddings; Catholic charities were forced to close and leave Massachusetts and Washington D.C. because both governments mandated that all adoption agencies had to provide children to homosexuals. So much for freedom of religion! And in Canada, same-sex marriage has led to such a chilling restriction on speech, that my speech here today could get me fined or jailed if given there.

To sum up, the government already permits homosexual relationships, but promoting them by equating them with married heterosexual relationships ignores the facts of nature, the needs of children and the health of society. While people with different sexual attractions are equal, not all behaviors are equally beneficial. True equality treats equal behaviors equally. It doesn’t demand that different behaviors be treated the same.

LaBarbera: Gay Rights Legal Brief Is a 'Tool of Repression'

In an interview with the American Family Association’s news affiliate Instant Analysis (formerly OneNewsNow), Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality condemned the large group of corporations that joined legal briefs asking the Supreme Court to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and Proposition 8.

LaBarbera blasted the corporations for “pushing homosexuality on the American public,” calling the amicus brief “a tool of repression against Christians and people of faith who simply want their right to not support homosexuality.” He claimed that if the Supreme Court rules against Prop 8, “that will be a sad day for American freedom” and “a disaster,” as deciding who should have the freedom to marry “should be left up to citizens.”

Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality acknowledges that corporations are at liberty to do what they want privately, such as adopting pro-homosexual policies.

“... But when you start pushing homosexuality on the American public using the government, that's another matter,” he offers. “Then it becomes a tool of repression against Christians and people of faith who simply want their right to not support homosexuality.”

According to the family advocate, the Prop. 8 case before the nation's high court is essentially the “Roe v. Wade” of the homosexual movement.

“If the court steps in and overrides the decision of the people of California not to support homosexual so-called marriage, that will be a sad day for American freedom,” he tells American Family News. “All across the nation citizens have spoken on this issue – [and] at the very least it should be left up to citizens.

“If the court imposes national homosexual marriage, that will be a disaster – and it will fuel the culture wars for decades to come.”

Of course, it is absurd to argue that a Supreme Court decision against DOMA or Prop 8 actively represses or takes away the rights of marriage equality opponents. But the Religious Right is often inconsistent in its arguments. Another AFA news item, however, explicitly rejects paying any attention to how the public feels, contradicting LaBarbera’s argument.

Sam Rohrer, a former Republican lawmaker in Pennsylvania and head of the Pennsylvania Pastors’ Network, tells the AFA that the public’s view on marriage equality doesn’t matter because judges should rule according to “moral law” established by God as “the base of the Constitution and the individual rights guaranteed by it are based on the Bible.”

The Christian Post reported on Monday that The Washington Post has published two polls that show "Americans are done with DOMA." But the Pennsylvania Pastors' Network (PPN) contends that the results are "likely skewed."

PPN president Sam Rohrer believes that polls are worth about the amount it cost to conduct them - particularly when they are financed by organizations that advocate for the destruction of marriage, including the Respect for Marriage Coalition.

"When they use polls to try to substantiate and/or to prove an acceptance of a position that has not been historically sound, I'm saying [that] is an inappropriate use of polls," Rohrer submits. "And any judge that looks to the poll as a determination of how they may or may not judge and rule on this case is to embrace moral relativism rather than moral law."

That is especially relevant now, as the U.S. Supreme Court is to hear arguments on the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act next month; the resulting ruling is expected near the end of June.

The Coalition's poll results show that 83 percent of Americans, "regardless of their personal opinion on the issue," believes same-sex "marriage" will be legal nationally "in the next five to ten years." But that can only happen if the federal Defense of Marriage Act is repealed by the Supreme Court or Congress.

And a national survey conducted on behalf of the Center for American Progress (CAP) and Gay & Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD) reportedly reveals that 59 percent of registered voters "oppose" Section 3 of DOMA, which defines marriage as between one man and one woman and a spouse as someone of the opposite gender.

The PPN president asserts that the purpose of the recent polls is to influence public opinion and the courts.

"What the Pastors' Network is saying is that when making a decision, a moral decision where you're talking about an institution created by God, God doesn't need public opinion polls; so neither should a judge consider what polls may or may not be," Rohrer contends. "It's a moral decision, and moral decisions ought to be made based on what God says -- not what some poll may or may not say."

Part of the oath of office high court justices take is to support and defend the Constitution. And as Rohrer points out, the base of the Constitution and the individual rights guaranteed by it are based on the Bible -- not the popular view of the culture.

Don Feder Warns Gay Rights Furthers the 'Sexual-Equality Death March'

Don Feder of the World Congress of Families today harshly criticized the increasing number of Republicans who favor legalizing same-sex marriage, which he said would turn the GOP into “the Party of Gross Stupidity.”

Feder warns that gay rights advocates like President Obama is leading Americans “from the bath houses and fern bars to the broad sunlit plains of spouse-#1 and spouse-#2 marriage licenses” as part of “the sexual-equality death march, which ends with the demise of Judeo-Christian morality.”

While some Republicans are laboring diligently to expand the Democratic base with amnesty, others are working with equal fervor to shrink the GOP base by betraying the religious right on marriage. Not for nothing are they called the Party of Gross Stupidity.

The ads also have President Obama cautioning us, "Our journey (to the promised land of gender-neutral bathrooms) is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like everyone else under the law." Fearless Leader has a remarkable talent for self-parody. (He will lead them from the bath houses and fern bars to the broad sunlit plains of spouse-#1 and spouse-#2 marriage licenses.)

"Gay marriage" itself is merely a milepost on the sexual-equality death march, which ends with the demise of Judeo-Christian morality.



The foregoing all flow logically from societal embrace of gay rights and marriage mutation. Once a sledgehammer is taken to the foundation, why should any norms stand?

Just as there’s always been same-sex attraction, there have always been blood relatives who’ve violated the injunctions of Leviticus, men who wanted harems, adults with an unhealthy attraction to children, fetishists, sadomasochists and Michael Jackson. Erotic attraction can get as messy as the human psyche.

Civilization depends on taming self-destructive sexual urges, which do great damage to the social fabric. The continuation of the species, and the proper upbringing of the next generation, is based on men marrying women, who will remain true to each other and raise their children with loving discipline.

To sanctify any other arrangement by calling it a marriage is stupid.

'Religious Liberty' Panelist: Compromise is of the Devil

The Family Research Council hosted a panel discussion Wednesday on religious liberty in America.  If you have paid any attention at all to the frantic warnings from FRC’s Tony Perkins that tyranny is on the march, you could have guessed what was coming.  The overall theme of the conversation was that the HHS mandate for insurance coverage of contraception is a dire threat to religious freedom in America.  So are the advance of marriage equality and laws against anti-gay discrimination – or the “sexual liberty agenda.”

The panel featured three lawyers: Adele Keim of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, Kellie Fiedorek of the Alliance Defending Freedom (formerly known as the Alliance Defense Fund) and Ken Klukowski of the Family Research Council.

Keim talked about Becket’s client Hobby Lobby, which is suing the Obama administration over the contraception mandate.  Or as Keim insisted on calling it, the contraception/abortifacient mandate. Keim argued that business owners are no less deserving of religious accommodation than churches or religiously affiliated nonprofits, saying “Americans do not lose their First Amendment rights when they go to work.” Of course by the standard she was invoking, many Americans could find their own rights and access to health care dictated by the religious beliefs of their employer.

The ADF’s Fiedorek focused on the “great peril” to religious liberty posed by the “agenda to expand sexual liberty and redefine marriage.”   She said in the conflict between sexual liberty and religious liberty, "people of faith" are "the ones being marginalized." She recounted a litany of such “persecution,” including now-familiar stories of a New Mexico photographer and a Colorado baker who were penalized under state anti-discrimination laws when they declined to serve same-sex couples celebrating commitment ceremonies.  Fiedorek compared cases in which businesses are required not to discriminate against gay couples to requiring an African American photographer to take pictures at a KKK event or a Jewish baker to create a cake decorated with a swastika.  She called it “particularly atrocious” that Catholic social service agencies were being required to abide by anti-discrimination ordinances – and were being “forced” to close.  She began and closed her presentation with quotes from the movie Chariots of Fire, ending with one that includes, “Don’t compromise. Compromise is a language of the devil.”

Klukowski talked about the role of religious freedom in the settling of America and the founding of the U.S.  And he recycled ridiculous religious right charges that the Obama administration believes not in freedom of religion but in the narrower “freedom of worship,” a notion that he said would be “profoundly disturbing” to the founding fathers.

The most interesting question from the audience focused on implications of the Bob Jones University case, and on whether the racialist Christian Identity movement could make the same religious liberty claims the lawyers were defending.  Why, the questioner asked, couldn’t the “conscience” rights the lawyers wanted for business owners not be claimed by a Christian Identity-affiliated business owner to deny doing business with African American people or interracial couples?

After a moment of awkward silence, Klukowski said that in the Bob Jones case, the Supreme Court had said the university could continue its racially discriminatory policies, but that its tax exemption was a benefit conferred by the government and could therefore be removed, especially in light of the post-civil war constitutional amendments addressing racial discrimination.  Klukowski did not directly address whether and how that principle could, would, or should apply to the current conversation about anti-gay discrimination.  He gave a confusing statement about what he said was the right of a business owner to throw someone out of their store for wearing a certain T-shirt or carrying a Bible.  The First Amendment, he says, allows people to be jerks in their private lives, but it was not clear whether he meant that the relationship between a business and its customers was “purely private” or falls into the category of public accommodation.

FRC Urges Congress to 'Pressure the Supreme Court' on Marriage Cases

The Family Research Council has launched what it is describing as “an ambitious, no-holds-barred campaign to keep marriage as between one man and one woman and preserve the American family.”  FRC is worried about two cases before the Supreme Court that will have “a lasting impact on the very soul of our nation” -- one on California’s Prop 8 and one on the federal Defense of Marriage Act. 

In a direct-mail piece dated on Valentine’s Day, FRC President Tony Perkins says it is important to get members of Congress “to pressure the Supreme Court to come down on the right side of marriage.” Recipients of the letter are encouraged to sign petitions to their representative and senators to urge them to “PRESSURE THE SUPREME COURT TO RULE IN FAVOR OF TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE!”

The text of the petition:

[Representative/Senator], as one of your constituents, I ask that you please use your influence to urge the Supreme Court to uphold the Defense of Marriage Act and state statutes banning same-sex “marriage.” The covenant marriage relationship between one man and one woman is a universally accepted social tradition that transcends all cultures and predates any religion. It is essential for procreation and the stability of society. I respectfully request that you do all in your power to urge the Court to uphold traditional marriage. Thank you for your service to our country.

The letter also recycles some of the same false claims that FRC and its allies made about federal hate crimes legislation, suggesting the advance of marriage equality will lead to the federal government dictating what pastors can preach about homosexuality or prosecuting those who preach against same-sex marriage.  Perkins also claims – falsely  – that the “vast majority of Americans do not want to see marriage redefined” and “the vast majority of voters are against the legitimization of same-sex ‘marriage.’” Actually, a majority of Americans supports marriage equality, according to recent polls by Gallup, Wall Street Journal/NBC, Washington Post/ABC, and CBS News.

But what difference do facts make to Tony Perkins? He says that if the Supreme Court were to support marriage equality, it would be “siding with an extreme minority and defying the will of the majority.” That’s why, he says, “the justices need to know up front that this majority will be anything but ‘silent.’”

FRC’s new “Marriage Preservation Initiative” is, of course, not the first effort to recognize, in Perkins’ words, that, “[d]espite the fact that Supreme Court justices have a reputation for being independent, they, too, are political and can be influenced by public pressure.” Back in 2010, after a district court ruling that Prop 8 was unconstitutional, the late Chuck Colson launched his own campaign to convince the justices that a pro-marriage-equality ruling would lead to “cultural Armageddon.”

Huelskamp: 70% of Americans Oppose Marriage Equality; Obama Wants to 'Destroy the Family'

While he certainly has a lot of competition serving among the likes of Michele Bachmann, Steve King, Louie Gohmert and Steve Stockman, Rep. Tim Huelskamp is doing his best to position himself as the leading congressman of the anti-gay radical right.

Huelskamp told Family Research Council president Tony Perkins in an interview before last night’s State of the Union address that President Obama seeks “to destroy the family and replace it with his view of a radical new social agenda.”

This President has a radical social agenda and the media will probably give him a pass when instead of talking about the fact that mom and dad don’t have a job we’re going to talk about how to destroy the family and replace it with his view of a radical new social agenda. So we’re going to hear a lot about that, we’re going to hear a lot of blaming and also a lot of talk about how he would solve this and that problem but gosh darn it he’s had four years to do that and he hasn’t solved one and I would argue it’s gotten progressively worse since he took office.

The congressman went on to criticize the Republican leadership for trying to avoid a discussion of social issues. Huelskamp, who last year falsely claimed that 85 percent of people in the U.S. don’t support legalizing same-sex marriage, insisted that Republicans “defend the seventy percent position that most Americans support traditional marriage,” which in Religious Right-speak means oppose marriage equality.

Of course, most polls find that just over half of Americans support same-sex marriage.

Huelskamp went on to call the Department of Defense’s extension of partnership benefits to same-sex couples and the Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA) as “radical ideas” that “most Americans do not accept” because they “specifically and selectively reward homosexual behavior.”

Once again, the majority of Americans favor job protections and partnership benefits for gays and lesbians.

The response from the general leadership is: gosh, we can’t talk about social issues. But the President can? Someone has to stand up and defend the seventy percent position that most Americans support traditional marriage, most Americans understand the value of family, they understand it’s under attack and they understand that, they see it, they believe it. So we got to stand up. I’ve always been confused by Republicans that refuse to support a seventy percent position and say, ‘gosh we can’t take our stand there.’ But whether it’s Obamacare, whether it’s these radical DoD [Department of Defense] proposals coming out of the White House or changing all the employment rules to specifically and selectively reward homosexual behavior, those are really radical ideas and most Americans do not accept them.

So we’ll have an opportunity to hear from the President but again don’t forget he is a lame duck President, he’s not running for election again and I think this could be the most radical we’ll hear from him in a long time because it is Obama unleashed. We’re going to hear tonight probably exactly what he would like to do and he promised he’s going to change America and he’s still after that agenda and that goal.

Youssef: Marriage Equality Will Destroy Western Civilization, Leads to Hell

Televangelist Michael Youssef writes in the Christian Post that the British parliament’s move towards approving marriage equality “could signal the beginning of the end for Western civilization as we know it” and that could eventually legalize polygamy. He concludes his column by warning that “Western populations” may all find themselves in Hell: “If Western populations don’t wake up, before long they will find themselves all the way in the Lake of Fire with the devil laughing his head off.”

On February 5, Britain’s House of Commons voted in favor of legalizing gay marriage. The vote is extremely alarming. It could signal the beginning of the end for Western civilization as we know it.

The idea of same-sex marriage is troubling even to some homosexuals, let alone those who hold a biblical conviction that marriage is intended by the Creator to be between a man and a woman.

The vote, which was 400-175, represented a major crack in the Conservative Party. More than half of its 303 members voted against or abstained from the measure. Prime Minister David Cameron may go down in history as the man who hammered the last nail in the Conservative Party coffin.



The hope now lies within the House of Lords. But that’s a fragile hope. Even if they kill off this troubling legislation, it will only die for a season. The homosexual lobby will bring it up again and again and again. They are tenacious and even vicious. Voters against the legislation have received abuse and even death threats. David Burrowes, a ministerial aide, has been called a “Nazi.”

And this I can predict with certainty: the next group in England to seek similar legislation for their cause will be the polygamists. Muslims in England have been waiting for this legislation to pass before trying to get their legal right to marry four wives.

It is hardly a secret in England that many Muslims claim welfare benefits for multiple wives while the British government turns a blind eye to the hemorrhaging of taxpayer money.

Every time Western civilization seems to reach the bottom, one discovers a new low even farther down the pit. If Western populations don’t wake up, before long they will find themselves all the way in the Lake of Fire with the devil laughing his head off.

Stanton: Same-Sex Marriage Is a 'Pernicious Lie of Satan' that Imperils Society and Humanity

Glenn Stanton of Focus on the Family appeared with John Rabe and Carmen Pate on Truth that Transforms, the flagship radio program of Truth in Action Ministries, to argue that same-sex marriage is an oppressive and satanic ploy. After Rabe asked him why opponents of same-sex marriage sometimes have problems explaining “why redefining [marriage] is deadly,” Stanton claimed that the marriage debate “goes deep into not just our own faith but humanity itself.”

He argued that resistance to same-sex marriage is necessary because “throughout the world if you look at how cultures do marriage, every single culture throughout time has done marriage as a union between men and women, God has given it to us this way.” “Every human culture needs marriage and we redefine it at our own peril,” Stanton said.

Later, Stanton repeated his assertion that homosexuality “is a really pernicious lie of Satan” because it denies “the distinct God imaging in each of us as males and females.” He went on to warn that gay equality leads to the “persecution” of Christians and will “redefine not only marriage but the family itself if not humanity completely.”

Stanton: This is a really pernicious lie of Satan to say that the gender part of humanity doesn’t really matter because the gender part of humanity is really denying the distinct God imaging in each of us as males and females. We need to understand that as Christians. That’s the biggest thing. The other is that, ‘you know kids don’t really need a mom and a dad they just need any configuration of loving adults who care for them,’ in fact, and this has already been in the case, we all know about what hate speech is, the fact of saying a child needs a mother and a father will be deemed hate speech because that is a statement against same-sex marriage and parenting. That’s a radical thing. The other thing is religious freedom, I mean we’re already seeing that on a vast, vast scale; the other side really in a pitiful way goes, ‘oh we’re not going to violate religious freedom, you’re not going to have to marry same-sex couples in your church,’ but it goes far beyond that. But it goes far beyond that. Doctors refusing to inseminate a lesbian couple because it violates his conscience, people like that have and will be hauled into court and prosecuted and persecuted because of their long held and deeply felt convictions about what is right and what children need.

Rabe: That’s a major point. The way that this has been portrayed societally and how it’s gotten so much traction is via the idea, ‘well if two people love each other, who are we to say that they shouldn’t be together and that they shouldn’t be able to get married?’ That very simple idea has a lot of persuasive power with people as it turns out and yet when you really break it down you start to get the sense that that’s really not what this is about. It’s not so much that people want to be able to have that long-term commitment to each other as it is being able to redefine what society is about and being able to silence people who disagree.

Stanton: That is exactly it. As a good friend of mine says, ‘you know a lot of these people advocating for same-sex marriage, I’ve been in the marriage work for decades, I’ve never seen these people come to the stump to advocate for marriage, the only time they are for marriage is when it has same-sex in front of it.’ Think about that. These are not advocates of marriage; they’re advocates for redefining marriage. They know that making gender any irrelevant part of the equation really does redefine not only marriage but the family itself if not humanity completely.

The Real Lesson of 9/11: Ban Same-Sex Marriage

End Times author Jonathan Cahn appeared alongside televangelist Joni Lamb on Daystar last month to promote his new book, The Harbinger, which uses biblical prophecy about ancient Israel to argue that God used the September 11 attacks and the 2008 economic crash to send “a wakeup call” to America.

After Cahn and Lamb explained that God “allowed” 9/11 to take place because the country’s sins “brought a crack into the foundation” and removed America’s “hedge of protection,” Lamb asked Cahn to “comment on all of the same-sex marriage that we’re just being inundated with across America.”

Cahn explained that if “we go this route” towards legalizing same-sex marriage, then it shows that Americans did not receive God’s message from 9/11 and are continuing to “depart from God.”

“We’re watching rapidly since 9/11, America depart from God and it’s becoming, just like Israel did, it became almost like a pagan nation, we America are forgetting our foundation and it’s becoming almost the same as a pagan nation.” Cahn said. “But to whom much is given, much is required; so if we go this route, God is warning and God is calling.”

Watch:

In his January message, Cahn said that the 2012 election, which saw President Obama re-elected and marriage equality affirmed at ballot box, will “accelerate” divine judgment on America… unless people begin reading Cahn’s book!

Dear Friend, Shalom and blessings! I pray all is well and that you are growing in His great peace and grace. Many believers sense we are living in a critical time. It's not just a sense.In the realm of physics, the tipping point is the point at which an object changes from a state of stable equilibrium into a different state. In sociology, the tipping point is the event of a previously rare phenomenon becoming rapidly and dramatically more common. In other usages, the tipping point is the critical moment in an evolving situation that leads to a new an irreversible reality.

This past election represented a tipping point concerning the future of America. The issue isn't political, but spiritual, concenting the future of America. It was not only what happened on a national level; the election for the first time, of a candidate who openly came against the biblical defination of marriage on top of an all endorsement of abortion. The ending of human life and biblical morality was enough to bring about the judgment and destruction of ancient Israel. But what was even more revealing was what happened on the state level.

Until 2012, the proposal to end the biblical definition of marriage had never won a popular vote. Every time the issue had been raised in an election, the biblical definition of marriage had been upheld, 32 out of 32 times. That all changed in early November 2012. And the change didn't happen in one state, but in four states at once. By popular vote, the biblical definition of marriage had either not been protected or over turned - a tipping point. In Minnesota, for the first time, voters failed to protect marriage as the union of man and woman. In Maine, Maryland and Washington, the majority of the electorate voted to end the biblical definition of marriage and inaugurate gay marriage - another first. It was not only a tipping point for America, but for each state as the numbers revealed: in Minnesota it was 51% who opposed the protection of marriage. In Maine, it was 53% vs. 47%. In Maryland, it was 52% vs. 48% and in Washington, it was 52% vs. 48%. For the first time in America's history the majority of Americans declared their opposition to the biblical definition of marriage.

In the wake of the election, articles came out with such quotes as "The GOP's Last Stand Against Gay Marriage," why evangelicals are in for an even more diminished role in Republican politics," "the American electorate as a whole is slowly but surely turning more secular," "its historic Tipping Point likely to influence other states and possibly even the Supreme Court."

It's hard not to agree that this was a huge turning point, a tipping point of a year. I don't believe it's an accident that it was in this same year, 2012, the year of this tipping point in America's departure from God, that The Harbinger was released. The word of warning continues to go forth, and is coming true.

Though recent developments stunned many believers, it should not have caught us by surprise. Without prayer, without revival, and without the intervention of God, the nation's course is clear. And once a tipping point has been reached, the momentum changes, and the speed of change accelerates. This month, let us all the more commit to pray, to shine as lights, and to live all the more against the direction of the day, and all the more all out for God.

Klingenschmitt: Obama Pushes 'Demonic Rule' by Backing Gay Rights

Religious Right activist and gay exorcist Gordon Klingenschmitt emailed members of his Pray In Jesus Name Project this week criticizing Presidnet Obama for endorsing gay rights during his inaugural address. Klingenschmitt, who believes Obama is ruled by approximately fifty demons, said that Obama’s support for gay equality is “an open invitation to the devil” and “demonic rule.” According to Klingenschmitt, Obama is “making Satan equal to God” as “he declares the demonic to be godly.”

Every kid deserves a mom and dad. We must defend traditional marriage.

Sadly, Obama equates sin with holiness, confusing lust with love, thereby confusing the demonic with the Holy Spirit, when Satan can never be equal with God. There is one reason homosexual sodomy will never be "equal" to traditional marriage: Satan will never be equal to God.

To discern selfish lust from selfless love, and the evil spirit from the Holy Spirit is critical to discerning whether sin can ever "equal" holiness, in human morality. Because every form of sin (including heterosexual sin) is a defiant human act of rebellion to God's commands, then sin is also an invitation to allow demonic rule, always without exception.

Thus "equality" for Obama is the same as making Satan equal to God, because he declares the demonic to be godly, when in fact nobody can serve two masters. Allowing sin to rule our national policies is an open rejection of Almighty God, and an open invitation to the devil, to manifest in our hearts.

Would you pray with me, for our President to repent, and renounce evil, and invite the Holy Spirit to rule his heart? Then let's petition all 100 Senators to protect traditional marriage.

Right Wing Round-Up - 1/24/13

  • Towleroad: Rhode Island House Passes Marriage Equality Bill in 51-19 Vote. 
  • Good As You: Bryan Fischer is hijacking the civil rights movement (is what I would say if I adopted his own movement’s tactics).

LaBarbera Tells Parent to treat Gay Son like an Alcoholic; Eliason Compares Homosexuality to a School Shooting

Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality spoke to Vic Eliason of VCY America about his twenty “Resolutions for Pro-Family Advocates Battling the Homosexual Agenda in 2013” on Crosstalk yesterday. When a caller told him that she does not “accept the behavior” of her gay son and forbids him and his partner from “staying in my house together,” LaBarbera said that accepting her son’s homosexuality is “a lie from the pit of Hell” and commended her for “praying for your son to be delivered out of that lifestyle.”

Caller: The reason I’m calling is I have a son that’s homosexual and my thing of it is, it’s what Peter said, even if he is my son I can love him unconditionally, I will not accept the behavior. If he comes to my house and brings a partner, there is no way they are staying in my house together. Jesus said: do you love me more than these? Even though there are children, we are to love him first. Jesus will bring our children out but we’ve got to be on our knees before the Lord and on our face. We bombard Heaven for their deliverance and at the same time we uphold these values before them.

LaBarbera: That’s wonderful. You love your son and that’s not in question. The lie of the other side is to love your son you have to love or embrace his homosexuality, and that’s really a lie from the pit of Hell. We don’t give an alcoholic, we don’t say, ‘I love you so much I’m going to give you a bottle of scotch every month.’ That’s not true love. True love is what you’re talking about, it’s defending godly values and praying for your son to be delivered out of that lifestyle.

Eliason also likened homosexuality to not only drunk driving but also the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, arguing that they are all manifestations of wicked behavior. LaBarbera lamented that the “homosexual movement” has successfully “redefined” and “marketed a sin,” changing the word “gay” to no longer “mean perversion.”

Eliason: Behavior is the problem. Let’s just think back a few weeks to a horrendous thing that happened in that little school where twenty-some little children were killed because of the behavior of an individual who was deranged and in my book, demonic, in what he did. But it was behavior. Let’s talk about a car wreck, when someone is driving drunk and the car goes crashing into someone and kills them, the result is horrendous but it’s because of behavior. And somehow this idea of behavior has escaped us, that everything should be status quo and that people are free to go out and imbibe and commit terrible crimes and violate nature because behavior is ignored.

LaBarbera: That’s a great point, Vic. The homosexual movement specifically is a movement that successfully marketed a sin. That’s what they did, they redefined a sin, marketed it as gay. Vic I had an old-time reader when I first started the Lambda Report, that was my original publication, and her name was Gay Guptill. Boy, was her life made a lot harder when they stole her name. You know the word used to mean merry, it didn’t mean perversion. They redefined that and it only went downhill from there.

Later, Eliason said that not reproaching someone’s homosexuality is much like failing to move “someone who is on a train track who is about to be hit with a speeding train” as homosexuality, according to LaBarbera, is “a ticket to Hell.”

LaBarbera went on to say that President Obama is “not really a Christian” since he supports marriage equality but admitted that he “underestimated” how Obama’s endorsement “would have an impact on the homosexual so-called marriage debate.”

Eliason: If you have someone who is on a train track who is about to be hit with a speeding train, you may have to speak loudly or firmly but the most loving thing you can do is get them off the track.

LaBarbera: Absolutely. Whether the left likes to hear it or not, embracing homosexuality as a lifestyle is a ticket to Hell and we want people not to spend eternity apart from God.

Eliason: We have Wanda standing by in Chattanooga, Tennessee, and Wanda you are on the line with Peter LaBarbera.

Caller: I just wanted to say that I think it’s more important to be obedient to God rather than to have all this fairness in marriage. I have noticed in reading my Bible that when a country’s leadership was corrupt, the nation usually went along with the corruption and that’s where we’re going right now.

LaBarbera: I think you’re right on. I think that’s part of the reason we lost on the marriage issue. Obama’s corrupt Christianity, so-called, of course he’s not really a Christian with what he’s defending, homosexual marriage. I underestimated how that would have an impact on the homosexual so-called marriage debate.

Scott Lively Warns 'Wedding Songs to Homosexual Marriage' are Responsible for Noah's Flood and End Times

Pastor Scott Lively yesterday in an interview with Sandy Rios of the American Family Association warned that homosexuality “is the issue of the End Times.” According to Lively, the advance of gay rights will lead to the persecution and killing of Christians like in the early days of the Church and is “another sign that I believe that we’re close to the end.”

He argued that “the last straw for God before He brought [Noah’s] Flood was when they started writing wedding songs to homosexual marriage” and said homosexuality “represents the outer extent of rebellion against Him in a society and the last thing that happens before wrath comes.”

Lively: We need to remember that in the time leading up to the Flood what the rabbis teach about the last straw for God before He brought the Flood was when they started writing wedding songs to homosexual marriage and Jesus said that you’ll know the End Times because it will be like the days of Noah. There’s never been a time in the history of the world since before the Flood when homosexual marriage has been open and celebrated, and that’s another sign that I believe that we’re close to the end.

Rios: You know Scott you’re talking to thousands of the people across the country and some of them are probably pastors. What would you say to pastors out there who are facing, you know they’ve come up with these issues, these issues have come across their knowledge, they can’t escape it, whether it’s domestic partnerships or its benefits for homosexuals or whatever and it’s hurdling toward gay marriage in every state, what would you say to them by way of preparing themselves and how they should respond?

Lively: It’s time to adopt an apostolic mentality as Christians and to look to Revelation. How did they prevail? They prevailed by the blood of the lamb, the word of their testimony, and I think is most important, they did not love their lives unto death. We’re entering into a time in which standing for the truth of God is going to cost you more than just a few people walking out of your congregation and the temptation to compromise with the world, especially on this issue. I think this is the issue of the End Times, homosexuality. It’s present, if you do a careful investigation of all the scriptures dealing with this from the beginning and all the way to the end, God is painting a very clear picture that this represents the outer extent of rebellion against Him in a society and the last thing that happens before wrath comes.
Syndicate content

Marriage Equality Posts Archive

Brian Tashman, Tuesday 07/30/2013, 4:40pm
Ohio-based Religious Right activist Linda Harvey today expressed outrage that a district court judge ruled on behalf of a gay couple, who are both Ohio residents but were married in Maryland, against the state’s ban on same-sex unions. One of the men has Lou Gehrig’s disease and is seeking to have his partner listed on his death certificate as his surviving spouse and be buried in the same family plot. Harvey called their lawsuit “nonsense” and charged that if the men wanted to be married, they should have married women: “There’s no discrimination or... MORE
Brian Tashman, Monday 07/29/2013, 12:40pm
Following CBN reporter Paul Strand’s heavily slanted report where he claimed that gay rights may be “biggest threat to religious liberty in all of America’s history,” Pat Robertson went on to argue that the gay community is on a mission to “destroy the church if need be, then to destroy the military if need be, then to destroy marriage if need be, then to destroy businesses if they need be.” He said that the gay rights advocates won’t stop until “the way they perform sex acts is acceptable” in society and turn America into Ancient Rome,... MORE
Brian Tashman, Friday 07/26/2013, 4:30pm
The Christian Broadcasting Network has released more footage from the recent Religious Right summit in Iowa organized by David Lane and featuring speakers like Ted Cruz and Rand Paul. Cruz, who told CBN in an interview that gay rights advocates intend to dispose of the First Amendment and pass hate speech laws, won plaudits from the audience of conservative activists for his attacks on gay rights advocates and “judicial activism.” “On marriage there is no issue in which we need to be more on our knees because the momentum is with the opponents of traditional marriage,... MORE
Brian Tashman, Friday 07/26/2013, 11:10am
In an interview with Steve Deace yesterday, Frank Schubert, the top campaign strategist for anti-gay groups including the National Organization for Marriage, accused the Supreme Court of “shredding of the Constitution” with its “horrendous” court decision on Prop 8. Schubert was upset that the ruling cleared the way for attorneys general not to defend certain laws. However, administrations from those of Harry Truman to George W. Bush (including Ronald Reagan) have refused to defend laws they believe are unconstitutional. “It’s going to come back I think and... MORE
Brian Tashman, Wednesday 07/24/2013, 2:20pm
Linda Harvey yesterday hailed Cleveland Right to Life for adding opposition to marriage equality to its mission statement, which previously focused on issues like abortion rights and stem-cell research. During a radio alert, Harvey said that Cleveland Right to Life leaders recently met with Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) and “made it clear that going forward his support for same-sex marriage will put him at odds with any official endorsement they are willing to give.” “As part of that meeting, Portman revealed that he would throw his support behind any upcoming effort to overturn... MORE
Brian Tashman, Tuesday 07/23/2013, 10:30am
In an interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network's David Brody on Friday, Ted Cruz rehashed the false right-wing claims that gay rights advocates intend to pass hate speech laws and force pastors to perform same-sex nuptials. Leading Religious Right activists made the same arguments during their campaign against the Shepard-Byrd Hate Crimes Prevention Act and in debates over state marriage equality bills. Of course, such laws would be unconstitutional and have never been used to silence religious leaders or limit the freedom of speech. If you look at other nations that have gone... MORE
Brian Tashman, Monday 07/22/2013, 3:15pm
Self-proclaimed prophet Cindy Jacobs delivered an ominous warning to America while speaking with fellow televangelist Jim Bakker, describing a message she received from God that the country will face divine punishment over the Supreme Court’s rulings on marriage equality. “Recently in the United States we’ve had these Supreme Court decisions that are against biblical marriage, and the Lord said to me, ‘duck your head, duck your head.’ I said, ‘oh God, duck my head?’” Jacobs asserted that God plans to “put a mark upon” believers... MORE