Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Homosexuality’

Preacher Arrested for Calling Homosexuality a Sin


Preacher Arrested for Calling Homosexuality a Sin

By Todd Starnes / http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/preacher-arrested-for-calling-homosexuality-a-sin.html

An American evangelist said he was arrested and interrogated about his Christian faith after he was caught on a London sidewalk preaching that homosexuality is a sin.

Tony Miano, a retired deputy sheriff and former chaplain with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Dept., was charged with “using homophobic speech that could cause people anxiety, distress, alarm or insult.”

Miano had been preaching on a London street corner during the Wimbledon Tennis Championships with a ministry group called Sports Fan Outreach International.

British police prepare to arrest American Evangelist Tony Miano.

British police prepare to arrest American Evangelist Tony Miano.

He was preaching about immoral living – and cited homosexuality as an example of lifestyle choices that are contrary to biblical teaching.

“I never used any gay slurs,” he said. “You would never hear me using slang or discriminatory language against homosexuals or any other group. That would be contrary to my faith.”

At some point, the evangelist quoted I Thessalonians 4:1-2 – a passage of scripture that mentions sexual immorality.

“I talked about women addicted to romance novels, men addicted to pornography, people with lustful thoughts, heterosexual fornication and homosexuality,” Miano told Fox News. “When I mentioned that the Bible was clear that homosexuality is a sin, a lady walked by and she glared at me and hurled the f-bomb.”

Miano said the woman came back a short time later and began to videotape his sidewalk sermon. Then, she called the police.

“They were concerned about homophobic speech,” he said. “But I told them I don’t fear homosexuals. The language I used was not homophobic, as I was not promoting fear or hatred of homosexuals.”

Miano said he did not limit his remarks to homosexual acts.

“I did not speak solely about homosexuality as a form of sexual immorality but also about any kind of sex outside marriage between one man and one woman, as well as lustful thoughts,” he said. “All of these are considered mainstream Christian positions and have been taught and believed by Christians for thousands of years.”

Police took the retired deputy sheriff to a nearby jail where he was fingerprinted. Officers also took a sample of his DNA and then he was interrogated.

“It was very distressing to be arrested and interrogated for openly expressing my deeply held Christian beliefs,” he said.

According to a transcript of the interrogation provided to Fox News, the officers asked if he really believed homosexuality is a sin. He was also asked whether he would help a homosexual who requested a favor.

“I was made to feel that my thoughts could be held against me,” he said. “The detective also asked me if I thought I was 100 percent right in what I had done. I said yes.”

Miano said he would gladly offer assistance to a homosexual.

“The Christian faith is dictated by the two greatest commandments – to love the Lord your God and to love your neighbor,” he said. “As such, I am compelled to love all people. Had a gay come up and asked me for something to eat, I would have fed him.”

But what troubled Miano is the idea that a hypothetical situation could have been used against him in court.

“I was actually going to be tried for how I thought,” he said.

In an ironic twist, the officers made arrangements to provide the evangelist with a Bible to read in jail – the same book that led to his arrest.

“The same book I read from in public which resulted in my arrest, was now the same book the police were giving to provide me comfort,” he said.

Miano, who is a member of the Evangelical Free Church, has been open-air preaching for eight years. He said this is the first time he’s been arrested.

“It was a rather surreal experience,” the retired deputy sheriff said. “I’ve conducted many interrogations but I’ve never been the subject of one.”

Miano spent about seven hours in jail before he was released without explanation and without an apology.

Now back home in Southern California, Miano said he fears that what happened in Great Britain could soon happen in the United States.

“I believe that’s what our government is going to eventually do here,” he said. “I believe homosexuals or others who are sensitive to their point of view will be visiting churches to listen to what preachers say from the pulpit. And I believe that pastors will be arrested in their pulpits for teaching what the Bible says about homosexuality and other sins.”

Andrea Williams, the chief executive of the British Christian Legal Centre echoed those concerns.

“It’s clear that there is already a clamp down on freedom of speech where people publicly express mainstream Christian views on sexual ethics,” he said.

Watch the sermon that got the evangelist arrested. Police arrive at approximately the 25:40 mark: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2vu9CI5Ij4&feature=player_embedded#t=0s  and  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMmq84eBM8k&feature=player_embedded#t=0s

 SARAH PALIN, SEAN HANNITY AND MARK LEVIN SAY YOU NEED TODD’S LATEST BOOK – DISPATCHES FROM BITTER AMERICA. CLICK HERE TO GET YOUR COPY!

Category:

Spiritual

Tagged with:

The Boy Scout Fallout


http://theblacksphere.net/2013/06/the-boy-scout-fallout/

boyscouts

The dust has scarcely settled from the Boy Scouts of America’s landmark vote to allow openly gay young men and boys to participate in scouting, yet already another controversy is brewing with parents and churches caught up in the crossfire.

Nationwide, congregations and families are coming to terms with the BSA policy change. In an effort to remain strong in their biblical convictions, many are being forced to cut ties with the BSA despite years of financial support and mutual trust.

But in doing so, their decision to withdraw support of the nation’s largest scouting organization has come under scrutiny by the liberal media and the leftwing blogosphere. Just days following the vote, Atlanta-area pastor Ernest Easley made national news when he advised his parishioners to cut all ties with BSA.

“I never dreamed I’d have to stand up publicly and say to parents: Pull your kids out of the Boy Scouts,” Easley told the Baptist Press May 28. “If you would have asked me that five years ago, 10 years ago, I would have laughed,” Easley said. “And even as I was saying it Sunday morning, I thought, I cannot believe I’m having to address this and encourage parents to pull their children out of the Boy Scouts of America.”

Louisville’s largest church, Southeast Christian Church, also made headlines when they cut ties with the Boy Scouts after the national organization decided to drop its ban on gay youth.

“We want everyone, including ourselves, to live by biblical standards,” said the Executive Pastor Tim Hester. “Truly for us it’s a logical decision … We cannot be distracted from the mission God has called us to.”

The BSA policy change is a sad reality that parents too must come to terms with. Michael Woodward, whose eleven year old son suffers from Asperger’s Syndrome and is particularly vulnerable to outside influences, has also decided to withdraw his support of BSA.

“I cannot have my son say the Scout oath “…to keep myself morally straight…knowing that the Scout’s definition of that is now in direct contradiction to God’s definition. I cannot risk having my Asperger son led by a role model that is in fact immoral. He would follow.”

So as parents and pastors make the hard choice to cut ties with BSA on account of their new policy, the liberal media has transferred their accusations of bigotry and intolerance from the BSA to its outgoing members and sponsors. Even before making a final decision at this summer’s annual convention, the Southern Baptist Convention has come under attack by those on the left for indicating that they will recommend for its 47,000 churches to pull away from BSA.

Whispers of litigation against these churches have already spurred non-profit legal foundations like Liberty Institute to take up potential lawsuits that are sure to come down the pike. It’s unfortunate that these institutions are being drawn into an ideological fight that they didn’t start nor go looking for.

Churches, families and the Scouts themselves are what some might consider collateral damage of a decade-long battle waged by the LGBT organizations against the BSA to impose their morality on a non-government entity. And thanks to a compliant media, clearly in the LGBT camp, these institutions must fend off accusations of intolerance and bigotry while trying to stand strong in their biblical convictions.

“We hoped to keep sex and politics out of Scouting,” lamented John Stemberger, a lifelong Scout with two sons in scouting, now leading the fight to start a new scouting chapter in defiance of the adopted policy. Unfortunately the LGBT community and the liberal media had other plans.

Sadly, it’s the parents and churches that must unravel this messy BSA policy and tenaciously step through the landmine of media scrutiny as they seek to live biblically in an increasingly anti-Christian society.

Category:

Spiritual

Tagged with:

Well, THey’ve Succeeded in Shoving it Down Further into Our Throats


Boy Scouts to Accept Openly Gay Members

Posted on May 23, 2013

gay

This makes no sense to me. What does scouting have to do with the gay lifestyle? Why do they have to make this into another recruitment ground? Their goal is to get kids while they are young. Girls think boys are gross and boys think girls have cooties. They’ll be confused and think this means that they are gay. It’s a true shame that liberals see this golden recruitment ground in our children.
Check it out:


In one of their most dramatic choices in a century, local leaders of the Boy Scouts of America voted Thursday to ease a divisive ban and allow openly gay boys to be accepted into the nation’s leading youth organization.

Gay adults will remain barred from serving as Scout leaders.

Of the local Scout leaders voting at their annual meeting in Texas, more than 60 percent supported the proposal.

Casting ballots were about 1,400 voting members of BSA’s National Council who were attending their annual meeting at a conference center not far from BSA headquarters in suburban Dallas.

The vote will not end the wrenching debate over the Scouts’ membership policy, and it could trigger defections among those on the losing side.

Continue Reading on www.foxnews.com …

Read more: http://conservativebyte.com/2013/05/boy-scouts-to-accept-openly-gay-members/#ixzz2UAwVEG9S

 

fox news logo

Boy Scouts approve plan to accept openly gay members

Published May 23, 2013

Associated Press

  • Boy Scouts-Gays_Angu.jpg

    Boy Scouts salute early Saturday morning, May 21, 2011 during New Jersey’s Boy Scouts Camporee in Sea Girt, N.J. The Boy Scouts of America’s National Council has voted to ease a long-standing ban and allow openly gay boys to be accepted as Scouts, Thursday, May 23, 2013. (AP)

GRAPEVINE, Texas –  The Boy Scouts of America threw open its ranks Thursday to gay Scouts but not gay Scout leaders — a fiercely contested compromise that some warned could fracture the organization and lead to mass defections of members and donors.

Of the roughly 1,400 voting members of the BSA’s National Council who cast ballots, 61 percent supported the proposal drafted by the governing Executive Committee. The policy change takes effect Jan. 1.

“This has been a challenging chapter in our history,” the BSA chief executive, Wayne Brock, said after the vote. “While people have differing opinions on this policy, kids are better off when they’re in Scouting.”

However, the outcome will not end the bitter debate over the Scouts’ membership policy.

Liberal Scout leaders — while supporting the proposal to accept gay youth — have made clear they want the ban on gay adults lifted as well.

In contrast, conservatives with the Scouts — including some churches that sponsor Scout units — wanted to continue excluding gay youths, in some cases threatening to defect if the ban were lifted.

“We are deeply saddened,” said Frank Page, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s executive committee after learning of the result. “Homosexual behavior is incompatible with the principles enshrined in the Scout oath and Scout law.”

The Assemblies of God, another conservative denomination, said the policy change “will lead to a mass exodus from the Boy Scout program.” It also warned that the change would make the BSA vulnerable to lawsuits seeking to end the ban on gay adults.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry also expressed dismay.

“While I will always cherish my time as a Scout and the life lessons I learned, I am greatly disappointed with this decision,” he said.

The result was welcomed by many liberal members of the Scouting community and by gay-rights activists, though most of the praise was coupled with calls for ending the ban on gay adults.

“I’m so proud of how far we’ve come, but until there’s a place for everyone in Scouting, my work will continue,” said Jennifer Tyrrell, whose ouster as a Cub Scout den leader in Ohio because she is lesbian launched a national protest movement.

Pascal Tessier, a 16-year-old Boy Scout from Maryland, was elated by the outcome.

Tessier, who is openly gay, is on track to earn his Eagle Scout award and was concerned that his goal would be thwarted if the proposed change had been rejected.

“I was thinking that today could be my last day as a Boy Scout,” Tessier said. “Obviously, for gay Scouts like me, this vote is life-changing.”

The vote followed what the BSA described as “the most comprehensive listening exercise in Scouting’s history” to gauge opinions.

Back in January, the BSA executive committee had suggested a plan to give sponsors of local Scout units the option of admitting gays as both youth members and adult leaders or continuing to exclude them. However, the plan won little praise, and the BSA changed course after assessing responses to surveys sent out starting in February to members of the Scouting community.

Of the more than 200,000 leaders, parents and youth members who responded, 61 percent supported the current policy of excluding gays, while 34 percent opposed it. Most parents of young Scouts, as well as youth members themselves, opposed the ban.

The proposal approved Thursday was seen as a compromise, and the Scouts stressed that they would not condone sexual conduct by any Scout — gay or straight.

“The Boy Scouts of America will not sacrifice its mission, or the youth served by the movement, by allowing the organization to be consumed by a single, divisive and unresolved societal issue,” the BSA said in a statement.

Since the executive committee just completed a lengthy review process, there were “no plans for further review on this matter,” the group added, indicating it would not be revisiting the ban on gay adults anytime soon.

Among those voting for the proposal to accept openly gay youth was Thomas Roberts of Dawsonville, Ga., who serves on the board of a Scout council in northeast Georgia.

“It was a very hard decision for this organization,” he said. “I think ultimately it will be viewed as the right thing.”

The BSA’s overall “traditional youth membership” — Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts and Venturers — is now about 2.6 million, compared with more than 4 million in peak years of the past. It also has about 1 million adult leaders and volunteers.

Of the more than 100,000 Scouting units in the U.S., 70 percent are chartered by religious institutions.

Those include liberal churches opposed to any ban on gays, but some of the largest sponsors are relatively conservative denominations that have previously supported the broad ban — notably the Roman Catholic Church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and Southern Baptist churches.

While the Southern Baptists were clearly upset by the vote to accept openly gay youth, the Mormon church reacted positively.

“We trust that BSA will implement and administer the approved policy in an appropriate and effective manner,” an official LDS statement said.

The National Catholic Committee on Scouting responded cautiously, saying it would assess the possible impact of the change on Catholic-sponsored Scout units.

The BSA, which celebrated its 100th anniversary in 2010, has long excluded both gays and atheists.

Protests over the no-gays policy gained momentum in 2000, when the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the BSA’s right to exclude gays. Scout units lost sponsorships by public schools and other entities that adhered to nondiscrimination policies, and several local Scout councils made public their displeasure with the policy.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/05/23/boy-scouts-approve-plan-to-accept-openly-gay-members/#ixzz2UAwkVDzv

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Have You Heard?


Church Defaced by Homosexuals Get’s Little News Coverage

St. Jude Catholic Church of the City of Westlake Village was defaced on Easter weekend. The following brief story appeared in the April 11, 2013 issue of The Acorn, a community newspaper that serves Agoura Hills, Calabasas, Oak Park, and Westlake Village in California:

“Vandals targeted the 32000 block of Lindero Canyon Road sometime between Fri., March 29 and Sat., March 30, authorities said.

“The graffiti included a reference to homosexuality, several four-letter words and a swastika, a source told The Acorn. One scrawl reportedly said, ‘God is gay.’”

The story got no attention outside the small communities mentioned above.

I happened to see the story because I was in the Los Angeles area for a business meeting and happened to pick up the community newspaper.

If some homosexual group had been the target of anti-gay graffiti, the story would have been carried by every news outlet. Hate crime charges would have been leveled against the perpetrators. Sensitivity training would have been demanded by homosexual groups across the country.

Any time someone makes a derogatory comment about homosexuality, the gaystapo goes into action. The media comply with front-page stories to insure that the person who said negative things about homosexuals never dares do it again.

The Huffington Post carries dozens of articles about politicians and Hollywood types that come out in favor of homosexual marriage. They want to continue to work in Hollywood. Their pro-homosexual stance is similar to what Rome demanded of its citizens.

As long as the people offered a pinch of incense to the Roman gods, they were permitted to worship their own god or gods. Consider this story about Polycarp who lived between AD 70 and 155:

“The emperors of Rome had unleashed bitter attacks against the Christians during this period, and members of the early church recorded many of the persecutions and deaths. Polycarp was arrested on the charge of being a Christian — a member of a politically dangerous cult whose rapid growth needed to be stopped. Amidst an angry mob, the Roman proconsul took pity on such a gentle old man and urged Polycarp to proclaim, ‘Caesar is Lord.”

“If only Polycarp would make this declaration and offer a small pinch of incense to Caesar’s statue he would escape torture and death. To this Polycarp responded, ‘Eighty-six years I have served Christ, and He never did me any wrong. How can I blaspheme my King who saved me?’ Steadfast in his stand for Christ, Polycarp refused to compromise his beliefs, and thus, was burned alive at the stake.”

People aren’t burned at the stake in America; they are burned by the media for any opposition to the gay agenda. At the same time, homosexuals are protected by the media when they attack people who oppose same-sex sex and homosexual marriage. Some of the attacks have led people to lose their jobs and even be sued for not complying to homosexual demands.

Read more: http://politicaloutcast.com/2013/04/church-defaced-by-homosexuals-gets-little-news-coverage/#ixzz2QwpMiWcF

 

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Homosexual activists are lying about their radical political agenda.


Homosexual Activist Admits True Purpose of Battle is to Destroy Marriage

Homosexual Activist Admits True Purpose of Battle is to Destroy Marriage

Written By Micah Clark   |

Even knowing that there are radicals in all movements, doesn’t  lessen the startling admission recently by lesbian journalist Masha Gessen.  On a radio show she actually admits that homosexual activists are lying about their radical political agenda.  She says that they don’t want to access the institution of marriage; they want to radically redefine and eventually eliminate it.

Here is what she recently said on a radio interview:

“It’s a no-brainer that (homosexual activists) should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. …(F)ighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we get there — because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie.

The institution of marriage is going to change, and it should change. And again, I don’t think it should exist. And I don’t like taking part in creating fictions about my life. That’s sort of not what I had in mind when I came out thirty years ago.

I have three kids who have five parents, more or less, and I don’t see why they shouldn’t have five parents legally… I met my new partner, and she had just had a baby, and that baby’s biological father is my brother, and my daughter’s biological father is a man who lives in Russia, and my adopted son also considers him his father. So the five parents break down into two groups of three… And really, I would like to live in a legal system that is capable of reflecting that reality, and I don’t think that’s compatible with the institution of marriage.”

For quite some time, the defenders of natural marriage have attempted to point out that the true agenda behind the homosexual demands organizations is not marriage equality; it is the total unraveling of marriage and uprooting traditional values from society.  (This will ultimately include efforts to silence and punish some churches that openly adhere to their religious teachings about marriage and sexual morality.)

While few have been as vocal as this lesbian activist was in this interview, we do have numerical examples proving her point.  When given the opportunity to marry, after laws have been struck down relatively small percentages of homosexuals actually bother to marry compared to their heterosexual counterparts.  This raises question about the true need to unravel marriage for the “fair” extension its benefits.  Only 12 percent of homosexuals in the Netherlands marry compared to 86 percent of their heterosexual peers.  Less than 20 percent of same-sex couples already living together in California married when given the chance in 2008.  In contrast, 91 percent of heterosexual couples in California who are living together are married.

Clearly this is about cultural change and tearing down the traditional family ethic, since it seems that most homosexuals living together neither need nor desire to marry, though they do desire to radically change marriage.

Gays and lesbians are free to live as they choose, and we live in a society which roundly applauds them doing so like never before in our history, but they do not have the right to rewrite marriage for all of society.

Micah Clark

In 1989 Micah Clark graduated from Southwest Baptist University in Bolivar, Missouri with a bachelor’s degree in Political Science. Micah interned as a member of the Indiana House of Representatives’…

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

The Rush Toward Sodom Has Accelerated


by

Homosexuality: The Political Battering Ram

 

“I believe granting liberty to gay people advances a compelling government interest, that such an interest cannot be adequately advanced if “pockets of resistance” to a societal statement of equality are permitted to flourish, and hence that a law that permits no individual exceptions based on religious beliefs will be the least restrictive means of achieving the goal of liberty for gay people.”

– Chai Feldblum, an open Lesbian who was nominated to serve as a Commissioner of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission by Barack Hussein Obama

The lid has yet again been blown off of the radical homosexual agenda. As the Supreme Court held hearings on the Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8, Obama spent $350 million on sexual indoctrination classes for children. The timing is impeccable.

Through the Personal Responsibility Education Program, students will be taught that no type of sex is wrong and the only “unsafe” behavior is becoming pregnant.

One can look to New York City, who implemented a similar type of sexual indoctrination on NYC schools in 2011. This curriculum is taught to grades 5, 8, and 10, which students receive standardized testing on.

Here are some examples of their twisted curriculum:

  • High-school students go to stores and jot down condom brands, prices and features such as lubrication.
  • Teens research a route from school to a clinic that provides birth control and STD tests, and write down its confidentiality policy. (Interesting, I will say that again – they are to write down the confidentiality policy. Did you hear that parents?)
  • Kids ages 11 and 12 sort “risk cards” to rate the safety of various activities, including “intercourse using a condom and an oil-based lubricant,” mutual masturbation, French kissing, oral sex, and anal sex.
  • Teens are referred to resources such as Columbia University’s website Go Ask Alice, which explores topics like “doggie-style” and other positions, “sadomasochistic sex play,” phone sex, oral sex with braces, fetishes, porn stars, vibrators and bestiality. (see Exodus 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10)

Do not those that developed this curriculum belong in jail?

Within a year after this perversion was implemented, an article was released in the Wall Street Journal which revealed cases of sexual misconduct by teachers, and that the teachers’ unions were protecting the teachers who received little to no consequence for their crimes against children.

For example, teacher William Scharbach was found to have inappropriately touched and held young boys. “Respondent’s actions at best give the appearance of impropriety and at worst suggest pedophilia,” wrote the arbitrator, the fox in the chicken coop who was hired by the union to protect the union, before giving the teacher only a reprimand. The teacher didn’t deny the touching but denied that it was inappropriate. This is criminal!

Also coinciding with the radical push for sexual deviancy upon America’s children, we cannot forget about Dan Savage, a radical homosexual who dared God’s justice by authoring a book titled “Skipping Towards Gomorrah.” Savage uses the guise of anti-bullying with his Obama-endorsed organization “It Gets Better” – which is nothing but an attempt to normalize homosexuality. Savage attacked the Bible and bullied Christian teens at a high school journalism conference. Yes, I said high school.

It was reported that the first thing the bully said was, “I hope you’re all using birth control,” that the Bible was “bulls—”, and then spewed out sexual innuendos during his speech. The bully also set an atmosphere of hostility towards Christians who espouse beliefs that he was literally taking on himself – he was attacking students while crying “victim”. More than 100 students stood up and walked out of his derogatory, perverted, deranged, vulgar, and backward-meaning speech.

If Dan is not licking doorknobs in hopes that others get sick with the flu, then he (and his husband) is a guest at the White House for President Obama’s 2011 LGBT Pride Month reception, as well as attendees at the White House anti-bullying conference.

Keep in mind this is the same president who overlooked the ice investigation into the pentagon (5000 pentagon employees were investigated for child pornography), who appointed over 225 homosexuals and transvestites into key positions in government (including Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, who “queerified” Harvard), and who appointed as a safe school czar Kevin Jennings who wrote the forward to a book entitled, Queering Elementary Education. (LINK) Jennings’ hero was Harry Hay, an icon for NAMBLA (North American Man and Boy Love Association) whose motto is “sex before 8 before it’s too late” when marching in gay pride parades.

The NEA has worked hand in glove with this agenda as well. They already had an LGBT caucus for teachers, but in 2010 felt it necessary to celebrate a new caucus: the “drag queen” caucus. The NEA also refused to pass Amendment I-24, designed to protect students from sexual misconduct by teachers. Many feel they refused to pass the amendment in order to protect teachers who have sex with students.

No wonder this bully felt so emboldened to attack a bunch of high school students, and right under the noses of their parents.

Dan Savage is also the same radical homosexual who said on HBO he wished all republicans were “f—ing dead.” In 2006, Savage said that a particular candidate for Senate “should be dragged behind a pickup truck until there’s nothing left but the rope,” which, by the way, stands contrary to the radical homosexual agenda’s premise for hate crimes legislation.

He also said on Bill Maher’s show, “I sometimes think about f—ing the s— out of Santorum. I think he needs it. Let’s bone that Santorum. I’m up for whipping up some Santorum in Santorum.” Savage also once claimed “the only thing stopping his d**k from being put in Brad Pitt’s mouth is a piece of paper”, speaking of legislation. Did you catch that? I thought he was married. Out of his own mouth, he just admitted that “homosexual rights” is not about marriage; it is about promiscuity. He contradicts himself at every turn, my friends.

If the president and homosexual lobby went out to prove my point they could have not done a better job. In concert, these two radicals are clearly and literally at war with God and America, as you know it.

The radicals are now operating in the light of day what they used to do through deceptive measures.

The American people have found out the radical homosexual agenda’s every deception through their “civil rights” cry, their “hate crimes” cry, and now their “bullying” cry. At every turn their false premise is discovered.

People have seen clearly, after Savage’s demonstration, their version of tolerance and love – it is quite the opposite. Attack and then cry victim is their face for the world to see. It is bigotry to the fullest – hate and intolerance towards anyone who resists their perversion.

America must come to the very realization that this agenda undermines everything we are. People like Dan Savage used to be jailed for their perversion, now they are hailed by this corrupt administration. When paralleling the actions of the radical homosexuals such as the Dan Savages of the world to the actions of our founders, we now understand why God calls it an abomination.

America, it’s time for you to learn from history, so it does not repeat itself. We can even look to Canada, who implemented homosexual marriage in 2005, and see the moral devastation.

It is clear to see that, unbeknownst to the average homosexual, the radical homosexual agenda is being used as a political battering ram to target our children and silence anyone who opposes their deviant and criminal behavior in an attempt to demoralize and enslave the American people.

John Adams, the second President of these Untied States, said, “Our Constitution is made for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

Charles Carroll, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, reminds us that “Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure (and) which insures to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of FREE governments.”

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

My own observation regarding this article by

The rush toward Sodom is becoming an all out turbo enhanced acceleration. This is the result of the Church not being the Church. We are admonished as Christians to be Salt and Light in our society. In Biblical times, salt was used to slow down the purification process of meat. As Christian “Salt” we are responsible to slow down the purification process of society and light the way toward the Lord Jesus Christ. Because we started “playing church”, instead of being the Church, our society has accelerated it’s decline morally and we are facing the persecution unlike the world has ever seen. That is why judgement has to begin with the Church.

Do we have enough fight in us? Will God answer our prayers for revival, or has He turned a deaf ear because of our indifference? Either we fight harder knowing the persecution that will follow, or open our mouths wider as they shove their lifestyle further down our throats.

Jerry Broussard

 

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

The Marriage Covenant


Gen 2:18-24; 18 The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”

19 Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field.

But for Adam no suitable helper was found. 21 So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

23 The man said, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’ for she was taken out of man.”

24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. (NIV)

After creation, the Triune God made a human man after their own image (that image is explained by Jesus in John 4). In order to prove to that man that there was no animal in all of creation suitable for fellowship, and procreation, God made “woman”, the female form of the human man. Thus, the Marriage Covenant was established; One man, one woman, one flesh.

“One flesh” means more than the marriage-bed sexual relationship between the united couple. Its meaning is a joining of two entities formed into one new being. That is why in Genesis 5:1 God called THEM “man”. One united couple commanded to populate the earth. The purpose for this deliberate designed union is explained in Malachi 2:15;

“Has not [the LORD] made them one? In flesh and spirit they are his. And why one? Because he was seeking godly offspring. So guard yourself in your spirit, and do not break faith with the wife of your youth.” (NIV)

Repeatedly we have witnesses of scripture of God’s condemnation of same sex sexual acts, both in the Old Testament, as well as the New Testament. God is absolutely consistent. Likewise is His judgment on a man and woman having sexual relations outside of marriage is sin. God’s deliberate design was, and remains; one man with one woman in covenant union to raise Godly children for the glory of the Kingdom of God.

When I was in high school there was a saying going around from part of my generation who ultimately became the hippies (who are in legislatures today). That saying was, “don’t shove your morals down my throat”. Those same people are doing just that to the American people with their war on the marriage covenant. The homosexual activist are so desperate to sooth their conscious with their activism to force the “straight” citizens of America to accept their chosen lifestyle as normal, and force the State to give them the same protection of heterosexual marriage. They want to force you and I to change our scriptural position that homosexuality is wrong. They have gone so far as to invade our public schools with materials designed to teach children that their chosen lifestyle is normal and should be explored. Nothing forced upon a people can be a good thing for that society.

No, it is not right to persecute homosexuals for their chosen lifestyle. All “bullying” efforts are wrong as well as any condemnation. I have had the privilege of knowing and working with several different people who practiced the homosexual lifestyle. One of them was one of my closest friends, and I miss him very much. He was a great mentor and I learned volumes from his experience and wisdom. I knew about his lifestyle choices and he knew mine. We never made it an issue, and I never condemned him or made him feel uncomfortable. He passed away several years ago. With all the others I have known and worked with, the issue was never discussed, nor did it affect our relationship. Respect demands acceptance of anyone’s chosen lifestyle that has no negative affect on humanity.

All this uproar over same sex marriage has produced division and discord in our society. Nothing good can really come out of all this, nor will the issue be settled on both sides. Any compromise will not be accepted, nor will it render any respect for anyone. The strife established can only bring about a bad result. Let us discuss several issues that pertain to this argument;

  1. The Federal government has no business even discussing this subject of same sex marriage. The First Amendment to the Constitution restricts them from forcing this definition upon the Church. Each religious institution has the First Amendment right to determine what is acceptable marriage unions. The States have establish laws that recognize, as lawful, marriage unions, including those from other States, or Countries. The Federal Government is not included in any of those decisions.
  2. What good is it for voters to vote on propositions/referendums if groups that don’t like the outcome of the vote and use their co-conspirators (the Federal Courts) to overturn the will of the people, nullifying those votes? Has it not it been the cry of the Left concerning “voter nullification”? Yet they demonstrate their Socialist ideology by using the courts to get their way and ignore the true will of the people.
    1. I have heard many people say, “Why should I vote when the other side will just get their way through the courts”?
    2. b.    Why do we have a Representative Republic if in fact our votes do not count?
    3. c.    Are we already living in a Marxist/Socialist society with the voting is just a sham to make us think our voice still means anything?
    4. Multiple politicians have rushed to the microphones of their media partners proclaiming their support of same sex marriage. Using the insidiousness of emotional blackmail, they pull at the heartstrings of middle-of-the-road ignorant voters hoping to get them to keep them in power. These tactics tell you everything about their true intentions.
    5. The Church (Catholic and Evangelical) is being demeaned and persecuted for taking God at His Word and trying to live out that Word;
      1. Because I do not agree with someone else’s perspective does not make me a hater, nor have I ceased to love people. A Biblical foundation is the ability to love people while hating what they do. For example;

i.    Can you love the alcoholic and hate their alcoholism? Yes.

ii.    Can you love the addict and hate their addiction? Yes.

iii.    Can you love the grumpy while hating their grumpy attitude? Yes.

iv.    Can you love a homosexual while hating their choice of the homosexual lifestyle? YES!

  1. Loving people never means having to agree with all they stand for and believe. Neither does your disagreement make you a homophobe, hater, racist or any other kind of hateful label hung on such people who disagree. A healthy society allows for differing points of view, and does not support anyone forcing others to believe their way.
  2. Christian witnessing has never been by force, as did Mohammad. Any groups of people claiming to be Christian and apply undue force on the populace to believe their way are misrepresentatives of God, and unacceptable by any healthy society.

I have been a student of the Word of God for over 40 years. I do not now, nor have I ever claimed to be some kind of expert. I am still learning. I do know what God’s Word says, and according to 2nd Peter 1, the Word of God is not subject to any private interpretation. In fact, I have learned that the Word of God explains itself and does not need any human to explain. Here are some facts from scripture;

  • God has condemned the practice of homosexuality PERIOD.
    • Lev 18:22; “‘Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.” (NIV )
    • Lev 20:13; “‘If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” (NIV)
    • Rom 1:18-32; 18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

 

21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

 

24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator-who is forever praised. Amen.

 

26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

 

28 Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them. (NIV)

  • We have two historical accounts of societies that allowed homosexuality to become the norm. The shame was gone, no laws to restrict their practice and society in general let them practice their lifestyle choice openly. Both societies ended up the same; destroyed.

The first is found in Genesis Chapter 19 and the second is detailed in Judges Chapters 19 & 20. In both cities, Sodom and Gibeah, the men of the city attacked the door of the houses because they wanted to have sex with the male visitors that arrived and was going to spend the night under the private roof of the host. In Sodom, the Angels had to pull Lot back in the house and blind the men so they could escape. In Gibeah, the Levite visitor gave them his concubine who gang raped her all night, causing her death. God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah with brimstone and fire. In Gibaeh God caused all of Israel to attack Gibeah because they refused to give up the homosexuals that murdered the woman by gang rape.

This has been the fate of any society that has allowed objectionable conduct to go unchecked, where God has been removed from their lives and the liberal thinking has created an environment that caused the people to say that good (righteousness) was evil, and that evil was good.

The entire subject of marriage does not belong with the Federal Government, and really, it does not belong under any State Government. History tells us about the uproar and objections produced when States decided to get into the marriage business by requiring marriage licenses. The debate was whether or not the State had any business in regulating the sacred bonds of marriage by raising revenue through marriage license. Debating what constitutes marriage and who should be allowed to engage is a subject our founding Fathers never imagined would ever occur. This national debate, and taking up the Supreme Courts time has been the results of the homosexual lobby forcing their chosen lifestyle down the throats of every American. It is not about equality. It is about their determination to force our society to accept their lifestyle as normal and not objectionable. It is a fight for the freedom of Christians, and others, to believe what we know to be acceptable behavior, and to reject what we believe to be abhorrent behavior. Notice that they have not made any attempts to get any of the Islam nations to make the same, forced, acceptance?

Those that scream the most about separation of Church and State are the ones that are determined to remove our free speech, and create laws that they define as hate speech. Such gagging of Christian Americans voices is in itself an abomination, and constitutionally wrong.

California and other States have caved in to provide same sex union contracts that offer most of the same privileges as married couples. That is not good enough for the homosexual lobby. They want to force us (socialism tactics) to accept what we know to be wrong, against God’s perfect will, against His creation and by all historical records, abhorrent to all societies. Furthermore, they hang demeaning labels on anyone who disagree with them and their allies (the entire political Left).

Stop the madness. Leave the sacred institution of marriage alone. You choose to be a homosexual, fine, but stop shoving it down my throat and stop teaching our children that your chooses are normal. I have never condoned prejudice, nor will I. I work hard at loving people and showing respect. In a quality society, such respect should be the norm, and any disagreement accepted.

As a nation we are in desperate need of revival;

  • Spiritual,
  • Constitutional,
  • Common respect for everyone, especially those that disagree with us,
  • and a revival of setting aside our differences so we can focus as a nation on ridding ourselves of our national debt,
  • reducing and eliminating entitlements,
  • and getting Americans back to work.

“Heavenly Father, in the mighty Name of Jesus our Lord and Savior, by the power of Your Holy Spirit, we join in prayer seeking Your Face, admitting we are sinners in need of our Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ. We repent of our sins, and make the deliberate choice to turn from our wicked ways. We choose to serve You by Your Word and live lives acceptable to You. Please heal our land. Please restore the nation you created for Yourself for the spreading of the Gospel around the world. Thank You for hearing our prayer and healing our land. In Jesus Name, Amen.”

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Yes. The Founding Fathers Had Much to Say About Homosexuality, and Thus, Same Sex Marriage


by

What The Founding Fathers Believed About Homosexuality

 

Founders111

I have made no bones about the fact that the ultimate authority on the issue of homosexuality is the Bible and it is crystal clear in condemning it. If others want to cite polls and commentaries and “experts” to attempt to bolster their claim in favor of homosexuality they are welcome to do so. However, what I find a bit disingenuous are those that will talk about rights within the context of the Constitution, which was written by men, not God as though the men who wrote it and backed it would have sided with practicing homosexuals today on the issue of marriage. I can tell you that the issue of marriage would have never been addressed as it is today, simply because the view of homosexuality was addressed first, thus making the point of same-sex “marriage” a ridiculous notion.

First, note that our founding fathers would have been outraged that homosexuals would be out in the open. They knew that such perversion would both undermine and erode the moral foundations of civilization. Under the British common law, the term sodomy was used to identify same-sex relations and was a capital crime. Understand that the founders referenced Sir William Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England extensively. He was a British attorney, jurist, law professor, author, and political philosopher.

Blackstone’s commentaries were the premiere legal source used by the Founding Fathers in America. So this should carry some weight with those who claim they know what the Founding Fathers knew and wanted concerning the issue of homosexuality, but I’m guessing they will dismiss it. In Blackstone’s Book the Fourth.: of Public Wrongs in his book titled Of Offences against the Persons of Individuals, Chapter Fifteen, he writes the following on pages 215-216 (emphasis added):

IV. WHAT has been here observed…, which ought to be the more clear in proportion as the crime is the more detestable, may be applied to another offence, of a still deeper malignity; the infamous crime against nature, committed either with man or beast…. But it is an offence of so dark a nature…that the accusation should be clearly made out….

I WILL not act so disagreeable part, to my readers as well as myself, as to dwell any longer upon a subject, the very mention of which is a disgrace to human nature. It will be more eligible to imitate in this respect the delicacy of our English law, which treats it, in it’s very indictments, as a crime not fit to be named; peccatum illud horribile, inter chriftianos non nominandum [“that horrible sin not to be named among Christians”—DM]. A taciturnity observed likewise by the edict of Constantius and Constans: ubi fcelus eft id, quod non proficit fcire, jubemus infurgere leges, armari jura gladio ultore, ut exquifitis poenis fubdantur infames, qui funt, vel qui futuri funt, rei [“When that crime is found, which is not profitable to know, we order the law to bring forth, to provide justice by force of arms with an avenging sword, that the infamous men be subjected to the due punishment, those who are found, or those who future will be found, in the deed”—DM]. Which leads me to add a word concerning its punishment.

THIS the voice of nature and of reason, and the express law of God, determine to be capital. Of which we have a signal instance, long before the Jewish dispensation, by the destruction of two cities by fire from heaven: so that this is an universal, not merely a provincial, precept. And our ancient law in some degree imitated this punishment, by commanding such miscreants to be burnt to death; though Fleta
says they should be buried alive: either of which punishments was indifferently used for this crime among the ancient Goths. But now the general punishment of all felonies is the fame, namely, by hanging: and this offence (being in the times of popery only subject to ecclesiastical censures) was made single felony by the statute 25 Hen. VIII. c. 6. and felony without benefit of clergy by statute 5 Eliz. c. 17. And the rule of law herein is, that, if both are arrived at years of discretion, agentes et confentientes pari poena plectantur

Most Americans are completely unaware that the “Father of our country,” George Washington, who would also be considered this country’s first “Commander-in-Chief” approved the dismissal from the service at Valley Forge in 1778 of Lt. Frederick Gotthold Enslin. Why did he do this? According to the orders, which are held at the Library of Congress, Enslin was “attempting to commit sodomy” with another soldier. Under the title of “Head Quarters, V. Forge, Saturday, March 14, 1778” there is the following entry:

At a General Court Martial whereof Colo. Tupper was President (10th March 1778) Lieutt. Enslin of Colo. Malcom’s Regiment tried for attempting to commit sodomy, with John Monhort a soldier; Secondly, For Perjury in swearing to false Accounts, found guilty of the charges exhibited against him, being breaches of 5th. Article 18th. Section of the Articles of War and do sentence him to be dismiss’d the service with Infamy. His Excellency the Commander in Chief approves the sentence and with Abhorrence and Detestation of such Infamous Crimes orders Lieutt. Enslin to be drummed out of Camp tomorrow morning by all the Drummers and Fifers in the Army never to return; The Drummers and Fifers to attend on the Grand Parade at Guard mounting for that Purpose.

What’s even more interesting is that Enslin’s dismissal came less than two weeks after another soldier, Ensign Anthony Maxwell, was acquitted of the charge of “propagating a scandalous report prejudicial to the character of Lieutt. Enslin” on Feb. 27, 1778. Penny Star cites the transcription of the court martial dated March 3, 1778: “At a Brigade Court Martial whereof Colo. Burr was President (Feby. 27th. 1778,) Ensign Maxwell of Colo. Malcom’s Regiment tried for propagating a scandalous report prejudicial to the character of Lieutt. Enslin. The Court after maturely deliberating upon the Evidence produced could not find that Ensign Maxwell had published any report prejudicial to the Character of Lieutt. Enslin further than the strict line of his duty required and do therefore acquit him of the Charge.”

Note that our first President viewed “sodomy” or homosexual relations with “Abhorrence and Detestation.” He was not a spineless, wishy washy, panty waisted man like the current occupant of the White House, who claims his views have “evolved.” He was a man that recognized perverse behavior for what it was, perversion. He was not alone either. In all thirteen colonies homosexuality was treated as a criminal offense and eventually that grew to encompass each and every one of the fifty states. By the way, that fell under “equal treatment under the law.”

The law was based upon Leviticus 20:13:

“If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death.”

This verse was “adopted into legislation and enforced by the colonies of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Connecticut.” Oh the irony that 2012′s GOP Mormon nominee for President Mitt Romney was the one to “legalize” homosexual “marriage” in Massachusetts. Here are just a few of the states and the punishments they executed for sodomy.

That the detestable and abominable vice of buggery [sodomy] . . . shall be from henceforth adjudged felony . . . and that every person being thereof convicted by verdict, confession, or outlawry [unlawful flight to avoid prosecution], shall be hanged by the neck until he or she shall be dead. NEW YORK

That if any man shall lie with mankind as he lieth with womankind, both of them have committed abomination; they both shall be put to death. CONNECTICUT

Sodomy . . . shall be punished by imprisonment at hard labour in the penitentiary during the natural life or lives of the person or persons convicted of th[is] detestable crime. GEORGIA

That if any man shall commit the crime against nature with a man or male child . . . every such offender, being duly convicted thereof in the Supreme Judicial Court, shall be punished by solitary imprisonment for such term not exceeding one year and by confinement afterwards to hard labor for such term not exceeding ten years. MAINE

That if any person or persons shall commit sodomy . . . he or they so offending or committing any of the said crimes within this province, their counsellors, aiders, comforters, and abettors, being convicted thereof as above said, shall suffer as felons. 13 [And] shall forfeit to the Commonwealth all and singular the lands and tenements, goods and chattels, whereof he or she was seized or possessed at the time . . . at the discretion of the court passing the sentence, not exceeding ten years, in the public gaol or house of correction of the county or city in which the offence shall have been committed and be kept at such labor. PENNSYLVANIA

[T]he detestable and abominable vice of buggery [sodomy] . . . be from henceforth adjudged felony . . . and that the offenders being hereof convicted by verdict, confession, or outlawry [unlawful flight to avoid prosecution], shall suffer such pains of death and losses and penalties of their goods. SOUTH CAROLINA

That if any man lieth with mankind as he lieth with a woman, they both shall suffer death. VERMONT

Ah, but some will say, “Thomas Jefferson would have never stood for this. He wanted liberty and equal rights for homosexuals to get married.” Not according to the record he didn’t. In Notes on the State of Virginia by Matthew Carey (1794) Jefferson indicated that in his home state of Virginia, “dismemberment” of the offensive organ was the penalty for sodomy. I’m guessing there weren’t too many sodomites wanting that to take place. You might say that is Jefferson’s home state, but not Jefferson’s thoughts on the issue. Not so fast. Jefferson actually authored a bill penalizing sodomy by castration (The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Andrew A. Lipscomb, editor (Washington, D. C.: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1904), Vol. I, pp. 226-227, from Jefferson’s “For Proportioning Crimes and Punishments)). The below capture of Jefferson’s legislation is courtesy of The Library of Congress and Apologeticspress.org.

jefferson on sodomy

I’ll conclude by stating that the founders understood the role that morality plays in a culture. Washington in his famous “Farewell Address,” which used to be memorized by high school students in America said:

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity [happiness]. Let it simply be asked, “Where is the security for property, for reputation for life, if the sense of religious obligations desert … ?”

And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. ‘Tis substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it [free government] can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?

Now understand this. I don’t believe that all the founders were Christian. Obviously there were Unitarians, at least one Jew, Christians, atheists and deists, and many that belonged to the Masonic Lodge. While morality apart from Jesus Christ results in moralism, there is no doubt that the morals that were taught in the Bible were taken to heart in regards to sodomy. In other words, if we take Washington’s words seriously, then he not only has referenced those of the homosexual community as “abhorrent and detestable,” but he has also said they cannot rightly call themselves patriots. Today, these criminals are out in the open spewing their filth and embraced by the criminals in Washington, instead of facing just punishment.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

God’s Design Challenged Again


‘Marriage Equality’ Spells ‘Marriage Extinction’

wedding rings

Next week the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on the most critical cases of our time related to marriage equality. On Tuesday, March 26, attorneys will make the pitch both for and against California’s Proposition 8. This, of course, is the Golden State’s pro-marriage amendment. It maintained the timeless definition of natural marriage as between man and wife.

Then, on Wednesday, March 27, the high court will consider the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), passed in 1996 with overwhelming bipartisan support and signed into law by then President Bill Clinton. It, likewise, secured the definition of legitimate marriage for purposes of federal law.

 Although both cases certainly address a multitude of legal and political issues, they also involve a number of moral and cultural considerations that, if wrongly decided, will literally shake Western civilization to the core.

The stakes could not be higher. Of central concern is whether the Supreme Court will put its official stamp of approval on that cartoonish contradiction-in-terms labeled “same-sex marriage.” Ultimately, these nine justices will decide recklessly either to deconstruct, radically redefine and render functionally trivial the age-old institution of natural marriage – or leave it alone.

They’d better leave it alone.

Here’s the bottom line: Homosexual activists don’t want the white picket fence. They want to burn down the white picket fence. The endgame is not to achieve so-called “marriage equality,” but, rather, to render marriage reality meaningless.

In a recent column headlined, “The Revolt of Intelligence Against ‘Marriage Equality,” worldview expert Rick Pearcey addressed one prominent “gay” activist’s admission that the destruction of natural marriage signifies the left’s ultimate cultural coup de grâce.

“Masha Gessen, a lesbian and a journalist, spoke frankly about this at a conference in Sydney, Australia,” he wrote. “‘It’s a no-brainer that we should have the right to marry,’ she said. ‘But I also think equally that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. … ‘Marriage equality’ becomes ‘marriage elasticity,’ with the ultimate goal of ‘marriage extinction.’”

Still, if counterfeit “same-sex marriage” becomes the law of the land, then a whole lot more freaky deaky will follow before marriage extinction inevitably occurs.

One of liberals’ favorite Alinskyite defense mechanisms is to ridicule the opposition if confronted with some irrefutable argument against some hallowed left-wing delusion. Such is the tactic employed whenever a thinking person walks into the room and points out this big ol’ gay elephant: Once the government pretends that some vague combination of “love” and “consent” are all that a “marriage” requires, then other “arbitrary” and “discriminatory” parameters beyond a binary male-female prerequisite must also go poof.

That is to say, if the Court magically divines some constitutional right to “same-sex marriage,” then full “marriage equality” necessarily demands that polygamous, incestuous and any other equally aberrant nuptial cocktail be likewise permitted.

It’s a “no-brainer,” right?

To that end, I’m very concerned with the Supreme Court’s recent history of radically redefining that which cannot be redefined. Though examples abound, I’m thinking specifically, as concerns the topic at hand, of the Court’s 2003 holding in Lawrence v. Texas.

In Lawrence, the liberal majority, for the first time in history, radically redefined male-on-male sodomy – hitherto classified “a crime against nature” – as a “constitutional right.”

In his characteristically brilliant dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia voiced my concerns better than I can: “State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality and obscenity are likewise sustainable only in light of Bowers’ validation of laws based on moral choices,” he wrote. “Every single one of these laws is called into question by today’s decision.”

So, if the high court removes one natural marriage parameter for one special-interest group, then “equal protection under the law” requires that it remove all natural marriage parameters for all special-interest groups.

Liberty Counsel made these very points in a friend-of-the-court brief filed with the Supreme Court: “Ultimately, there is no principled basis for recognizing a legality of same-sex marriage without simultaneously providing a basis for the legality of consensual polygamy or certain adult incestuous relationships,” noted the brief. “In fact, every argument for same-sex marriage is an argument for them as well.”

Another brief filed by 18 state attorneys general voiced similar concerns: “Once the natural limits that inhere in the relationship between a man and a woman can no longer sustain the definition of marriage, the conclusion that follows is that any grouping of adults would have an equal claim to marriage,” they wrote.

The brief further observed the self-evident “no-brainer” that legitimate marriage is “optimal for children and society at large.”

It’s all very simple. If anything is marriage, then everything is marriage. And if everything is marriage, then nothing is marriage at all. “‘Marriage equality’ becomes ‘marriage elasticity,’ with the ultimate goal of ‘marriage extinction.’”

I sincerely hope that the honorable and learned men and women who sit upon the highest bench in the land can recognize that all of these San Francisco-style social-engineering games are a deceptive means to a destructive end.

And it’s not the emotionalist end they’ve dolled-up and dished out. The left’s fierce push for “gay marriage” has nothing to do with “marriage equality” and everything to do with “marriage extinction.”

Or, as Ms. Gessen candidly put it: “[I]t’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist.”

I just pray that at least five justices still think it should.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

The United States of America Needs a Revival of Conservatism


Without True Conservatism, The Obama’s Of The World Will Prevail

Recently, Republican Party Chairman, Reince Priebus, announced plans to spend $10 million dollars reaching out to minority groups in a bid to attract a different group of American voters. The Republicans also plan to begin to embrace immigration reform and to soften the party’s stance on gay-marriage. A recent study commissioned by Republicans concluded that the party’s electoral success hinged on becoming more “inclusive and welcoming” of “non-traditional voters.” In other words, the Republicans are caving, and moderate and liberal influences are about to take over what is left of the opposition party, and conservatism is about to be bloodied.

Apparently, the Republican Party no longer wishes to pretend to represent “old white male” conservative voters. The people that work hard, pay their taxes, and raise their families to love God, respect morality and observe the law. Somehow, Republicans have come to view winning as more important than fighting the good fight. Somehow, Republicans have come to believe that Log Cabin Republicans and children of illegal aliens will provide for the Republican Party of tomorrow and I resent their foolishness. It will only cause the future defeat of their party and the further destruction of America.

Soon to be invited to the Republican ranks, the minority homosexual community or the “Log Cabin Republicans,” was a group founded in 1977 to defeat California legislation (see Briggs Initiative) banning homosexuals from teaching in public schools. Since its birth as a homosexual advocacy group, the Log Cabin Republicans (LCR) has only endorsed one Republican candidate for President, John McCain. All prior Republican Presidential candidates failed to secure this groups support because all Republican candidates subscribed to the traditional definition of marriage and paid little attention to the false cause of gay rights.

Many wrong thinking Republicans believe this group shares a conservative ideology. Aside from what some consider a fiscally conservative, small government, low taxes, free markets, strong defense slant, nothing could be further from the truth. Log Cabin Republicans support liberal causes including “Corporate Diversity”; ”Family Fairness”; and “Is Sexual Orientation a Choice?” It is also worth noting that LCR was instrumental in defeating “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (see Log Cabin Republicans v. United States) and refused to participate in the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). I wonder why.

I lost my faith in any established political party a long time ago. They are all, owned by “big money” influences of one philosophy or another. The Republican and Democrat Party have both done their fair share of damage to the U.S. Constitution and fiscal strength of our nation. Now it appears both parties wish to destroy what is remaining of traditional American values by setting up the old “big tent.”

I have some news for Republicans. I only vote for conservatives. Your national party has not been worth a damn since Reagan left office. You are losing the political fight because few of you possess the courage to tell the truth and stand for traditional American values. You may move to the center to accommodate your newfound homosexual constituency and the entitlement cultured Hispanics like your competition President Obama, but in the end, you will lose the core of your party, conservatives.

Without tradition, there is nothing conservative. The basis for Conservatism is tradition. Voting Republican does not make anyone a conservative any more than owning a gun makes one a constitutionalist. If conservatism fails to win the culture war reshaping our government and political parties, we will all become a nation of indentured servants and slaves to the coming tidal wave of immoral tolerance washing over our Republic.

Rarely do Americans consider the long-term costs of “feel good” ideas like tolerance and social justice. Instead of acknowledging their failures and working to correct the damage they have caused the Republican Party is about to undertake a “rebranding” by unfolding its “Big Tent” strategy again. A vision that includes gay marriage, dual citizens, and the entitlement addicted. Big money influences have laid down the law and Republican lackeys are bowing to their demands.

Political favors will not solve America problems. Respect for honored traditions by honorable men and women will. If the Republican Party turns its backs on conservatism, they might as well hand the government over to the Democrats. Based upon the last 13 years there does not seem to be much of a difference, just one failure after another.

Damn these Cowards!

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Tag Cloud