Beck: James Dobson's New Novel Is a Modern Day 'Uncle Tom's Cabin'

Last week, James Dobson stopped by Glenn Beck's television program last week to discuss his new novel "Fatherless," a "faith-based, dystopian thriller" set in the year 2042.

Dobson warned Beck that there is something deeply wrong with a society in which more and more couples are deciding not to have children, which prompted Beck to want to know how we can change the "hardness of people's hearts" that is at the root of this problem.  After Dobson asserted, predictably, that a lack of Christian faith is the ultimate cause, Beck agreed and predicated that, just as Harriet Beecher Stowe's "Uncle Tom's Cabin" played an important role during the Civil War, Dobson's "Fatherless" would play a similar role today because it will "wake people up":

More Evidence That David Barton's 'History' Cannot Be Trusted

As we have said time and time again, David Barton's books, DVDs, radio programs, and presentations are so riddled with misrepresentations that just about any factual claim he makes needs to be checked for accuracy.

And Barton once again demonstrated the need for such fact-checking when he recently delivered a presentation at Glen Medows Baptist Church in San Angelo, Texas where he made an utterly laughable claim about the Supreme Court's ruling in the case of Abington Township v. Schempp which declared that school-sponsored Bible reading in public schools was unconstitutional.

In Barton's telling, the Court struck down the practice because reading the Bible was going to give students brain damage:

The Supreme Court, when it took the Bible out of public schools, said that this is without precedent; there is no precedent in our history for taking the Bible out of schools but this is the time to do it.

Now, if there is no historical precedent, why would they say the Bible has to go out of schools?  I mean, everything we have in history says just the opposite, so why?  They quoted Dr. Solomon Grayzel on the reason that we need to get the Bible out of schools ... In the Supreme Court decision, this is what the Court said why the Bible has to come out of schools; the Court says this:

If portions of the New Testament were read without explanation, they could be, and had been, psychologically harmful to the child.

Time out.  Let me see if I get this: if we keep reading the Bible in schools, our kids are going to suffer from brain damage? Yeah, that was the reason given by the Court for the removal of the Bible out of the classroom back in 62-63.

Of course, if you actually read the ruling in the case, you will find that this citation of Dr. Grayzel appeared at the beginning of the decision when the Supreme Court was merely describing the road the case had taken through the court system, noting that Grayzel's testimony had been heard during the initial trial. 

On top of that, Barton also utterly misrepresented the point of Grayzel's testimony, which was to note that forced Bible reading from a Christian perspective in public schools was potentially damaging to Jewish students:

Expert testimony was introduced by both appellants and appellees at the first trial, which testimony was summarized by the trial court as follows:

Dr. Solomon Grayzel testified that there were marked differences between the Jewish Holy Scriptures and the Christian Holy Bible, the most obvious of which was the absence of the New Testament in the Jewish Holy Scriptures. Dr. Grayzel testified that portions of the New Testament were offensive to Jewish tradition, and that, from the standpoint of Jewish faith, the concept of Jesus Christ as the Son of God was "practically blasphemous." He cited instances in the New Testament which, assertedly, were not only sectarian in nature but tended to bring the Jews into ridicule or scorn. Dr. Grayzel gave as his expert opinion that such material from the New Testament could be explained to Jewish children in such a way as to do no harm to them. But if portions of the New Testament were read without explanation, they could be, and, in his specific experience with children, Dr. Grayzel observed, had been, psychologically harmful to the child, and had caused a divisive force within the social media of the school.

Just about everything in Barton's description of this court decision is fundamentally misleading and demonstrably false ... and yet it will continue to make no difference to those on the Right who regularly cite him as an expert historian.

Harvey: Gay 'Deception' Going Global

Mission America’s Linda Harvey used her daily radio bulletin today to criticize efforts to limit the use of sexual orientation conversion therapy, a form of pseudo-science which has been denounced and discredited by all of the country’s leading professional medical organizations. Harvey, however, claims that gay rights supporters have tried “to make up the evidence against it” because “the successful efforts of some to leave homosexual behavior behind are terribly threatening to the homosexual political agenda” and its global ambitions:

It’s not a coincidence these days when we start to see a new angle on homosexuality suddenly pop up in news all over country and indeed the world. There’s often big money and big organizations behind whipping up a fake frenzy and creating these so-called grassroots movements, and that’s the case with the new call to ban counseling for teens on homosexuality. Christian counselors around the country are alarmed at this ferocious assault on patient freedom and freedom of religion, shouldn’t a family have the right to support their teen who wants counseling about how to overcome homosexual attraction? Not according to homosexual pressure groups.

You see, the successful efforts of some to leave homosexual behavior behind are terribly threatening to the homosexual political agenda so they have decided that this counseling must be discredited even if they have to make up the evidence against it. There’s big money behind the push to do this. Parents, schools, churches, youth organizations, we all need to stress the benefits of choosing a heterosexual identity and behavior, consistent with good health, a moral lifestyle and the way God designed us. Homosexual feelings can change with God’s help and with sound counseling. But California just passed a law to ban such therapy, a law introduced and supported with the help of gay rights groups.

This agenda is also starting to appear globally. A recent meeting of left-wing groups that lobby the United Nations called efforts to change sexual orientation a ‘violation of human rights,’ and I guess that will be their spin going forward. The good news is that in that meeting were several voices supporting this counseling. In Great Britain, there are efforts already underway to discredit this type of counseling in advance of a coming vote on same-sex marriage. Let’s pledge friends to hold fast to the truth, even as deception abounds.

Right Wing Round-Up - 2/22/13

Right Wing Leftovers - 2/22/13

  • Even though studies keep proving that morning-after pills don’t cause abortion, Religious Right groups will continue to baselessly argue otherwise. 
  • Family Research Council invites you to the National Organization for Marriage’s anti-gay Marriage March.
  • Yet another tough break for professional vote-suppressor Hans von Spakovsky. 
  • Rick Warren is very, very, very sad that Tim Tebow pulled out of his appearance at Robert Jeffress’ megachurch. 

Larry Klayman Reveals Obama's 'Stalinist Power Grab'

We’ve been so amused by Larry Klayman’s recent antics that we almost missed his latest call for armed revolution against President Obama and his “Stalinist power grab,” which he believes will increase “the size and role of ‘his’ anti-white, pro-radical Muslim, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, pro-gay and lesbian, pro-feminist, atheist, pro-illegal immigrant and socialist government and eliminate what few liberties and freedoms we have left.”

According to Klayman, Obama is “moving to kill any revolution” against him by preparing “to wage a counter-revolution against We the People” through black helicopters, the United Nations, Agenda 21 and “his equivalent of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.”

Unsurprisingly, Klayman’s fears are all based on reports from the one and only WorldNetDaily.

In the last few weeks WND has published three articles, all of which are verifiable from independent investigation and fact checking, that unmask Supreme Leader Barack Hussein Obama's plan to use force to extend his increasingly dictatorial power and take over the United States. Sound farfetched or just the usual paranoia the left likes to ascribe to us on the right? Hardly, given Obama's executive actions designed to pave the way for an ultimate gun ban and his State of the Union address just this week – which revealed more about his vision and plans to "communize" the United States by grossly increasing the size and role of "his" anti-white, pro-radical Muslim, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, pro-gay and lesbian, pro-feminist, atheist, pro-illegal immigrant and socialist government and eliminate what few liberties and freedoms we have left.

It is ironic indeed that just as one socialist dictator, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, is about to expire of terminal cancer on his deathbed in a Cuban hospital, another one, who is much more powerful, is seeking to extend his control in a Stalinist "gulag style" power grab. Unlike Chavez and his also-dying buddy, Cuban communist strongman Fidel Castro, our fraudulently elected ineligible president is not just some two-bit dictator-terrorist of a Third World country; he is the so-called leader of the free world – an oxymoron if there ever was one since the "mullah in chief's" apparent plans are to eliminate individual freedoms and instead install a "Big Brother" regime domestically and worldwide through his comrades at the United Nations and their Agenda 21.

Here is a synthesis of what WND reported about Obama's plans to wage a counter-revolution against We the People; as he knows that it is only a matter of a short time that his Stalinist power grab will force law-abiding, God-fearing citizens to rise up in revolution as our Founding Fathers "found" themselves compelled to do against a far less malevolent monarch, King George III, in 1776.

Claiming to have been a constitutional law professor during the earlier part of his "career," Obama knows this all too well. He knows that his vision of a "new America," when put into total practice as he is now doing after his "re-election," will ultimately send We the People into the streets and cause us to reject his total tyrannical sovereignty over us. And that is why, coupled with his Interagency Working Group to Counter Online Radicalization to Violence, Obama and his evil cohorts in his administration are moving to kill any revolution on our part.

This can be seen as well through the black-helicopter sorties now being flown by Obama's military flunkies in our urban neighborhoods, which WND crack reporter Bob Unruh reported on. The black helicopters in recent weeks have been flying overhead in major American cities, such as Miami, Chicago and Houston, firing practice rounds from government-issued machine guns. These so-called exercises are said to prepare for urban violence, but from what quarter? Terrorists, or Founding-Father-like American citizens who eventually will rise up in revolt to Obama's despotic rule?

And then there is the recent column by WND Editor Joseph Farah, which reveals that the Obama-controlled government is stockpiling and hoarding guns as part of a secret security force ("Why is government stockpiling guns, ammo?"). Farah unmasks something he predicted years ago and writes: "Many of you will remember a story I broke a long time ago – about presidential candidate Barack Obama's little-noticed announcement that, if elected in 2008, he wanted to create a 'civilian national security force' as big and as strong and as well funded at the Defense Department." It would now appear that this civilian national security force, in conjunction with the other despotic measures discussed above, are his equivalent of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard – a force that will put down any rebellion by freedom-loving Americans if he deems it necessary.

In this context, we can understand even better Obama and company's real intention with regard to so-called gun control. He wants to do away with our Second Amendment right to bear arms, just as King George III attempted to do knowing full well that revolution was coming and on the near horizon. Like our Founding Fathers, We the People will ultimately pledge our lives, our sacred honor and what fortunes we have left under this so-called president, to fight for and preserve our great nation.

Rios: Grades Dropping Due to LGBT-Inclusive Education in Public Schools

On her radio program today, the American Family Association’s Sandy Rios read listener responses to her recent interview with anti-gay activist Brian Camenker, who claims that bullying-prevention programs and LGBT-inclusive curricula are ruining American education.

Rios praised one email from “Margaret,” who wrote that “basic skills” like reading and writing are being “pushed aside in favor of teaching moral choices and left-wing agenda. It is no wonder American students have fallen so far behind other nations.” Margaret lamented that schools “rob the innocence of children through forced instruction of alternate lifestyles,” adding: “When two percent of America’s population seeks to dictate to the rest of us how our children should be educated, we have truly sunk into a pit of moral decay.”

Rios concurred and claimed that schools are “teaching radical environmentalism or homosexuality” now “instead of math and science,” which she explained is “the reason our test scores are so shockingly low compared with the world.”

It’s sad; it’s just amazing how they are throwing—whether they are teaching radical environmentalism or homosexuality. Can you imagine that they are teaching this instead of math and science? And they are. And Margaret’s right, that’s the reason our test scores are so shockingly low compared with the world.

According to Rios, it all goes back to a plan of Bill Ayers to “radicalize” teachers and the National Education Association’s goal of “promoting homosexuality in every discipline in public schools.”

The radicals of the ’60s, the college radicals of the ’60s, they were rebelling in the streets against everything, really. Some of them were ‘make love not war’ marijuana drones but some were really smart radicals. Because they did not win the battle in the ’60s they focused their sights on education. Look at Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, that is what they all did, they went into education and they populate our universities, they saturate them and they train teachers. Bill Ayers of the Weather Underground is one of the leading educators in the country, he’s a terrorist, it’s just amazing that he writes books and people read them, and that’s how the educators have become radicalized.

The National Education Association was led by a gay man for over twenty years who was not out until he stepped down and they started promoting, radically promoting, homosexuality. This started a long, long time ago, they started with a film called ‘It’s Elementary,’ I remember when that came out; it was a total propaganda piece for homosexuality. Gradually the National Education Association made this one of their largest concerns, was promoting homosexuality in every discipline in public schools, so that’s how it started.

Gun Activists Warn Obama is Raising a Private Black Army to Massacre White Americans

Gun Owners of America president Larry Pratt appeared Tuesday on the Talk to Solomon Show alongside conservative blogger Greg W. Howard, of Twittergate fame, for another chance to spew anti-Obama conspiracy theories.

Pratt predicted that President Obama may begin confiscating guns in order to provoke a violent response to justify further oppression, which host Stan Solomon feared would lead to the imprisonment of hundreds of thousands of people.

Pratt once again insisted that Obama is acting like King George III, a sentiment with which Solomon concurred, saying, “That will happen quickly and they will wipe those people out to set an example.”

But Solomon wasn’t finished: “I believe they will put together a racial force to go against an opposite race resistance, basically a black force to go against a white resistance, and then they will claim anyone resisting the black force they are doing it because they are racist.”

Howard agreed: “You may be right because he has been sowing the seeds of racial hatred; we were healing quite well as a nation on racial issues until Obama came along and now we have a lot of racial discord.”

After arguing that Obama is “not American” and not a natural born citizen, Howard maintained that Obama may begin “wiping out a few hundred people who own guns, pull a large scale Waco or a Ruby Ridge type incident” and have it “tinged it with racial overtones.” But just in case Obama goes through with his plans to “take down” the Internet, “people are setting up phone-trees all over the place” to stop Obama in his tracks.

“If Obama can take your guns away he can take your car, he can take your home, he can take your bank account, he can take your very life,” Howard said.

Unsurprisingly, Pratt agreed with their insane ramblings: “I do agree that the Obama administration would definitely be capable of something as evil as you were suggesting.”

However, Pratt warned that “a lot of people resolved, ‘no more free Wacos,’” and that if Obama “starts playing the massacre game the way you did at Waco, well, you’re going to get surrounded, you won’t be able to go home safely, your family won’t be safe.”


Kuhner: Kerry Will Begin 'Crushing Capitalism' to Advance 'Green Socialism'

In a column today, Washington Times writer Jeffrey Kuhner claims that Secretary of State John Kerry’s recent speech about the United States’ failure to confront the reality of climate change really represents a plot to destroy capitalism and America itself.

Kuhner claims that the scientific consensus on climate change is really “junk science,” “the greatest hoax of our time” and a fabricated “dark prophecy of an eco-apocalypse.”

But why create the hoax in the first place?

Kuhner maintains that “the secular left needed a new cause” following the collapse of communism and “found it in green socialism,” which he says is now central to their goals of “crushing capitalism.”

He goes on to “expose” scientists’ grand scheme to destroy America:

Secretary of State John F. Kerry has identified America’s primary enemy. It’s not Russia, Iran, China or North Korea. Nope. It’s something even greater and more sinister: climate change. That’s right. One of the most powerful people in the world and fourth in line for succession to the presidency, Mr. Kerry is obsessed with junk science and global temperature changes. This would be comical if it were not so tragic.

His answer is radical environmentalist legislation — high carbon taxes, imposing a cap-and-trade system upon manufacturers to coerce them into lowering carbon emissions and greater transnational cooperation in combating so-called climate change. In short, Mr. Kerry peddled a dark prophecy of an eco-apocalypse unless collective action is taken.

He’s wrong — dangerously wrong. Global warming is the greatest hoax of our time. In fact, the scientific evidence points the other way: Rather than heating up, the planet’s temperatures have either been steady or slightly cooling off over the past decade. The progressive left, however, continues to insist that climate change is real and irrefutable. The green movement has become a pseudo-religion, marked by blind faith, emotionalism and intolerance against dissenters.

In the end, global warming is not — and never has been —about science or even the environment. It’s about politics. Specifically, it boils down to one seminal goal: crushing capitalism through massive taxation and bureaucratic centralism in the name of environmentalism. When the Berlin Wall collapsed, the secular left needed a new cause. They found it in green socialism. Progressives no longer argued that free-market economies exploited the working class; rather, they now supposedly exploit and ravage the planet. Either way, the private sector is to be dominated by a liberal ruling elite. The new green is the old red.

Mr. Kerry’s speech shows how disconnected from reality the administration is. Imagine what our mortal enemies must be thinking. The Kremlin’s thugs, Beijing’s communists and Tehran’s mullahs — they have all (rightly) concluded that America is destroying itself. Without firing a shot, they are watching Uncle Sam slowly commit suicide. Green socialism will crush the productive sectors of our economy, draining America of the growth, dynamism and prosperity necessary to remain a world power. Embracing a climate change agenda will turn us into Europe, which is the path to national decline.

In short, Mr. Kerry is a postmodern liberal. He is a left-wing globalist, who champions anti-capitalism and multicultural social democracy. He has not fundamentally changed since his early days in politics. His philosophy is rooted in the radical chic of the 1960s: the hatred of America.

It is deeply disturbing that the man at the head of U.S. diplomacy was a traitor to his country and fellow soldiers. In 1971, he slandered our troops by lying—under oath in front of a Senate committee—that he saw U.S. troops commit countless atrocities not seen since “Genghis Khan.” He then later threw away another soldier’s medals on Capitol Hill to protest the Vietnam War. His actions not only libeled our noble efforts in Southeast Asia, they gave aid and comfort to the communist Viet Cong. This alone should have disqualified him from being secretary of state.

Keyes: Gay Rights Will Undo Laws Against Rape, Incest and Pedophilia

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

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

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

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

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