Louisville, KY—Yesterday activist federal district Judge John G. Heyburn II ruled that Kentucky must recognize the “marriages” of four couples who were “married” in other states and Canada, and, in so doing, struck down part of Kentucky’s marriage law, including its constitutional marriage amendment passed by 74 percent of the voters in 2004. The marriage amendment stated: “Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Kentucky. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized.”
Recommended by Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and nominated by George H.W. Bush, Judge Heyburn became a federal judge in 1992. Relying on Justice Kennedy’s 2013 majority opinion in United States v. Windsor, which struck down the section of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that defined marriage for federal purposes, Judge Heyburn said he “cannot conceive of any reasons for enacting the [marriage] laws challenged here.” He discounted procreation or “responsible procreation” and child rearing as legitimate reasons for the marriage laws. He spoke of the law “evolving” and cited a dissent from Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes (who once wrote “Three generations of imbeciles are enough” as justification for the state forcibly sterilizing people), that “judges do and must legislate…” Judge Heyburn acknowledged that when courts go against something as fundamental as “traditional marriage,” “they risk some of the public’s acceptance.” He then tried to answer his own question: “How can a single judge interfere with that right?” In his failed attempt to address these issues, Judge Heyburn downplayed religious concerns and beliefs, saying again the law has “evolved” and pointing to three decisions from Justice Kennedy (Romer v. Evans, striking down Colorado’s law on homosexuality; Lawrence v. Texas, striking down Texas’s sodomy law; and Windsor, striking down part of the federal DOMA).
[The first part of this article was published yesterday… read it here.]
by David Theroux
According to a Radar Online source “with inside knowledge of the network’s machinations,” the New York Daily News has reported that “It’s an absolute disaster for A&E. . . . Now, it’s a standoff between the family and the network, who is going to blink first? There is no way Phil is going to apologize for his comments because he doesn’t think what he said is hateful or prejudice, it’s his religious beliefs. . . . A&E isn’t going to walk away from ‘Duck Dynasty,’ they can’t afford to do it. It’s just a matter of getting both sides to agree on how to move forward.”
And indeed this is exactly what has happened, even though GLAAD is not glad about A&E’s reversal, stating that “Phil Robertson should look African American and gay people in the eyes and hear about the hurtful impact of praising Jim Crow laws and comparing gay people to terrorists.” In response, Brietbart’s Warner Todd Huston has noted: “It is interesting that GLAAD put Robertson’s comments about African Americans first in its own statement about his comments on homosexuals. One might think that GLAAD feels it lost the battle on that issue and needed the cover of ‘racism’ to add heft to its complaints. Still, the statement takes Robertson’s comments out of context and mischaracterizes them. Robertson made no such claim that Jim Crow laws did not harm African Americans, nor did he ‘compare’ homosexuals to terrorists.”
Cultural “leftists” have been pursuing a campaign against Judeo-Christianity, traditional morality, gender identities, the nuclear family, limited constitutional government, free enterprise, the family, civility, individual liberty, personal responsibility, the rule of law, and much more. In the name of “tolerance” and “diversity,” this campaign has sought to impose a “secular theocracy” to smother bourgeois values and coercively impose “progressive” culture on an unwilling public, and gender issues have become a key rallying point (see, for example, articles in the Wall Street Journal, National Catholic Register, Hartford Courant, Reuters, and Washington Times).
How often have we heard someone pontificate on what “the church” should do, or be… or what “the church” should not do or be? Perhaps we have even done it ourselves. Such words are similar to pronouncements, like “There ought to be a law”, of “Someone should do something about…” In each case, the speaker is telling us that he has a problem with something and somebody else should take the responsibility for fixing it.
There are times when this is actually the case, like when we believe that someone should have been looking out for the Americans in Benghazi. Most of us had no control over that situation. Other times, these are just the rantings of the armchair quarterbacks observing the political and economic games. However, in the case of “the church”, this is much less often the case.
This may become more clear if we look at what “the church” really is. Obviously, it is not the edifice. The denomination is not “the church”. Neither is the pastor or priest. All of these are important and serve a function, but they are not “the church”. So what is “the church”?
With A&E Network facing an avalanche of public protest and in just over one week of its decision to place family-patriarch Phil Robertson on “indefinite hiatus” from its megahit reality series Duck Dynasty, the network caved.
When the PC outrage industry went into high gear with an angry Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) demanding Robertson’s head regarding his comments on homosexuality in an article by Drew Magery in the January 2014 issue of GQ (the magazine commonly viewed as having branded the concept of “metrosexual”), A&E executives promptly suspended Robertson from the enormously popular, cable-TV program, and support for his suspension echoed throughout the conventional media with cries of his being “homophobic” and “antigay.”
In the article, when asked about his religious faith, Robertson noted that his own youthful debauchery was self-destructive and put his marriage on the rocks, and that these were reversed only by his conversion to Christianity. He added that he now considers sexual relations other than those between a man and woman in wedlock to be sinful. In so doing, Robertson did not support bans on homosexual advocacy or relations but instead paraphrased Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers — they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”
Lesbian activist Masha Gessen tells the truth about the motives behind the drive for gay marriage. The reaction of the audience reveals much of the LGBT accepts the concept of the destruction of the marriage, and the traditional family. Ms Gessen, though completely off base in her thinking, is refreshing in her honesty. She is honest about her homosexuality. She is honest about her goals.
Political correctness prevents many from making anything of this revelation. Even churches that should know better are soft on this subject. To many pastors more concerned with numbers on Sunday morning, the thought of offending some congregants is beyond their comprehension. The nature of the gospel itself is that it is offensive to those who wish to continue in their sin. The question for these pastors is that is it more loving to tickle people’s ears with what they want to hear, or to give them the revealed truth we see in the Bible that calls this behavior an “abomination”.
As widely reported, Phil Robertson, the patriarch in A&E’s breakaway hit “Duck Dynasty,” recently ran a-fowl of homosexual pressure groups, ruffling “progressive” feathers throughout concentrated pockets of deep blue America. He remains suspended “indefinitely” for candidly summarizing, in a recent interview with GQ Magazine, the millennia-long “Love the sinner, hate the sin” biblical stance on homosexual practice.
“It seems like, to me, a vagina – as a man – would be more desirable than a man’s anus. That’s just me,” he bluntly opined. “I’m just thinking: There’s more there! She’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes!”
Dudes worldwide – save self-styled “gays,” Pajama Boy and a few liberal men actually rumored to be heterosexual – responded: “Eww! I know, right.”
“You know what I’m saying?” continued Robertson. “But hey, sin: It’s not logical, my man. It’s just not logical,” he noted.
Benjamin Franklin famously quipped, “In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.”
Franklin evidently failed to envisage today’s postmodern left. For the conservative, there exists at least one other certainty, and it is this: The degree to which “progressives” attack you corresponds precisely to the degree with which you challenge any among their assorted, distorted and sordid sacred cows.
What would you call a 33-year-old man who both had and axiomatically acted upon a deviant sexual appetite for underage, drug-addicted, runaway boys? (No, not Jerry Sandusky.)
What would you call a man of whom, as regards sexual preference, his own friend and biographer confessed, “Harvey always had a penchant for young waifs with substance abuse problems”?
So much for the left’s “consenting adults” rhetoric on sex. Forever the consummate conservationists, our self-described “progressive” friends at the ACLU, MSNBC and elsewhere have been ramping-up efforts to downsize from “consenting adults” to merely “consenting” – a far less cumbersome qualifier in the noble struggle for unrestrained sexual license.
Tolerating “intergenerational romance” for “minor-attracted” adults is all the rage these days.
Ever hear of Kaitlyn Hunt? Over the past year or so this poor, misunderstood lesbian woman’s “anti-gay persecution” has become a cause célèbre among “gay rights” activists and other left-wing purveyors of perversion.
Despite mass rallies and online petitions signed by hundreds-of-thousands of the uber-”tolerant,” the clearly “homophobic” Florida criminal justice system has, nonetheless, convicted Ms. Hunt of multiple felonies for sexually assaulting – repeatedly – a 14-year-old girl.
I spent an afternoon the other day strolling through the Valley View Shopping Center in Dallas. Its once fine stores are slowly closing one by one. In their place, quaint Mexican vendors with amateurishly painted signs and sparse stores now hawk their wares as they would in a seedy swap meet.
Valley View was never upscale like ritzy Highland Park, but 18 years ago when I arrived in town, Valley View was a place where one could wander among big name stores and professional marketers. Clothes were always top fashion. The restaurants were havens of delectable eating. One could spend a day there and feel like he was immersed in value. It was an uplifting experience. Today it is Death Valley. Today it is tamales and rap music, velvet paintings of Christ and obese Latina women chattering like magpies. South of the border culture is slowly snaking its way into Dallas. How long will it be before it is encroaching on Yankee environs?
Sure, there are still many pockets of high class and taste throughout Dallas and the country. But the writing is on the wall. A lower culture has invaded a higher culture, and all the pitiful political correctness of our establishment mentalities is not going to be able to cover it up if our Republican quislings in Washington grant amnesty to the silent 15 million illegals lurking in back of the invasion. With amnesty will come the next wave, which will be 30 million, then 60 million, then death of the America that the Founders envisioned.
Whatever are we doing permitting the world to push us all into a politically correct vocabulary, fully understanding that words eventually lead to deeds. We have allowed the whole PC culture to set the verbiage and the agenda for far too long.
Dictionary.com explains why. It tells us that the noun “politically correct” means:
marked by or adhering to a typically progressive orthodoxy on issues involving especially race, gender, sexual affinity, or ecology.
You will note that even the dictionary site notes that it is language of the progressive left. Unless we have a worldview compatible with the godless philosophy that sees man as essentially helpless and misguided, in need of an ruling class to take care of them – we have no business falling into the trap of permitting the progressive left to control the terms of almost every conversation.
We use their terms, which are never favorable toward the true conditions in our land. We permit them to use the term pro-choice, when they only choice they believe in is the choice to end the life of an unborn infant. They don’t believe we should have choices about the food we eat, our environment, even our light bulbs. It’s time to put an end our acceptance of their terminology which is designed to sound good, and conceal their anti-life, anti-freedom agenda.
Whether you agree with the jury’s verdict that set George Zimmerman free, there are a few things behind the whole sorry situation that we need to consider. The most obvious is the racial element that those afflicted with the skin color myopia cannot seem to find release from.
Of course Trayvon Martin was a black teenager. Zimmerman, though he had a white man’s name (if there is such a thing – and a Jewish one at that) was Latino. Since describing him as a member of another minority group did not fit the narrative of the regime and the formerly main stream media, he was called a “white Hispanic”, whatever that is. Emphasizing the Jewish name tied into another prejudice among these supposedly unprejudiced elite and elite wannabees. The whole situation was made to order for those looking to add to the story of black oppression while ignoring the scourge of crime visited on our country by a small segment of that population.
Then we have, what is normal in some portions of our society, the propensity of some youth to believe that the appropriate response to an insult or some form of disrespect is to punch someone in the face or worse. Violence is glorified in then entertainment world that caters to this group, as manhood is defined as the ability to inflict pain and suffering on others. This is somewhat a result of rage built up over the years through the leftist propaganda telling them their lives would be fine, if only people who worked hard and played by the rules would be more fair to them and hand out what was earned by the sweat of their brow.
Yesterday’s vote by the Boy Scouts National Council to admit openly gay scouts is another example of liberals gaining positions of power while others went about the day to day operation of helping boys. The decision comes after 61 percent of leaders, parents and members polled nixed the idea with only 34 percent supporting it.
This is standard operating procedure for progressives… to insinuate themselves into leadership positions and inflict their will on the rest of the population. Being ordered about by the elites is, somehow, the antithesis of what America is all about… or at least used to be about.
Many parents have declared their unwillingness to have their sons participate in the scouting program that had been a bastion of clean living American values. However, those in charge of the organization now believe they have been called upon to change this. It seems that these people are now considering homosexual behavior to be part of the clean living code. It also seems that the implied sexual activity is acceptable to them where they may not want they scouts to be similarly involved with their own daughters.
Lesbian activist Masha Gessen tells the truth about the motives behind the drive for gay marriage. The reaction of the audience reveals much of the LGBT accepts the concept of the destruction of the marriage, and the traditional family. Ms Gessen, though completely off base in her thinking, is refreshing in her honesty. She is honest about her homosexuality. She is honest about her goals.
[Editors note: this article was first published in 2009. Since then we have revived it from time to time as the message is still applicable and one we have to keep in mind when hear the politically correct propaganda coming from our progressive government.]
Worshiping at the altar of diversity as advocated by the politically correct elites serves their purposes well, but what does it do for the rest of us? Does it help us unite to solve common problems, or does it split us into multiple camps where all we can see is our competing interests? If it is the latter, should we be viewing this politically correct article of faith as simply a well meaning error, or as a sinister attack on our country’s ability to function and lead the world?
Pursuing identity politics, that is, looking at each person as a member of some small, but downtrodden group rather than as an individual, serves to promote isolation from the rest of society and focus our attention on our differences rather than our similarities. It keeps us fragmented and distracted. We face many challenges in our country today. We need to pull together, but all we hear from our government is divisive rhetoric that keeps us at each others throats. The poor are told their plight is the fault of the rich. Union members are told corporate greed keeps them from getting what they want. One racial group thinks they are being held down by another. While the other group sees their opportunities given to less qualified workers based strictly on skin color.
The left, through the Democratic party has successfully balkanized America so many people see themselves first as members of some sort of aggrieved group that needs help in redressing some real or imagined wrong. One must give them credit for forging this disparate group, with often competing interests into a coalition that keeps many of them in office… even though few of the grievances are ever resolved.
Over the years I have come to the conclusion that those who scream the loudest about the supposed virtue of tolerance, tend to be the least tolerant people in society… and that their feigned openness is just an excuse to promote one agenda or another that is not generally accepted.
Those who are promoting the inclusion of homosexuals in the marriage laws are often not so open to other points of view. They do not just want to be left alone, they want to see to it everyone that else falls in line with their desire to promote practices they tell us are nobodies business as they take place in private, behind closed doors. It is obvious that the homosexual community has moved far beyond seeking the right to be left alone. This is the very thing conservatives and libertarians have been pursuing for years – for everyone.
At a recent shareholders meeting, Starbucks CEO, Howard Schultz noted a downturn in business following the company’s well publicized support for Washington’s statewide referendum supporting homosexual marriage. This came about as the Nation Organization for Marriage organized a boycott against the high priced coffee chain. Apparently those of us with traditional – read Christian – values can still have an impact on a company whose web page touts its socially conscious initiatives. While concern for making a positive impact on the world is an admirable objective, most of of the projects have a decidedly progressive, globalist tilt to them, and would fall far short of making this a better world.
Well, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is at it again. In their typical obsessive hate-filled paranoia, the SPLC has issued another baseless assassination piece against anyone whom they consider to be “right-wing.” They call their hit piece, “The Year in Hate and Extremism.” Of course, only “right-wing” leaders are so characterized. According to the SPLC, left-wing leaders are always the voices of reason and goodness. Barf!
The SPLC article lists several conservative leaders as examples of “hate and extremism.” They include Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), U.S. Representative Trey Radel (R-FL), former Arizona Sheriff Richard Mack, Matt Barber of the Liberty Counsel, FOX News radio host Todd Starnes, and ConservativeDaily.com’s Tony Adkins. “Even further to the right,” according to the SPLC, are Oath Keepers (founded by Stewart Rhodes), Judicial Watch’s Larry Klayman, and, yes, yours truly.
I take special delight in knowing that the SPLC ALWAYS puts me on or near the top of their most “dangerous” patriot lists. (Richard Mack and Stewart Rhodes also seem to merit this same attention.) I can’t tell you what a relief this is to me! I would hate to think that all of this work that I’m doing would somehow be overlooked by an extremist left-wing hate group like the SPLC. Plus, every time the SPLC puts me on one of their lists, donations, contributions, and support for my work always skyrocket. So, if you want to put your money behind a man who especially irritates the SPLC, you can donate to Chuck Baldwin Live.
Just a few short days ago, we witnessed the Democrats touting their facts that GM was alive and Osama was dead. The second part of their proclamation passes the truth detector. I’ll leave the evaluation of first part to those who can do simple math and understand that when the expense number is larger than the revenue number, there is no profit. However, in view of recent events, we’ll be looking at the Democrats victory dance in Charlotte. These are the Democrats who booed the inclusion of God and recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capitol in their party platform. These are the same Democrats who cautioned the country not to “spike the ball” when reports of bin Laden’s death reached our shores. Then they disregarded their own counsel when it appeared to be politically advantageous.
It is reported that as the US backed rebels stormed the American consulate in Benghazi they were yelling “we’re all Osamas”. Apparently they took umbrage at the President’s celebratory attitude toward the death of their “fearless leader”. This puts the man named, by his own choice, Barack Hussein Obama in an interesting situation. As Americans look at the death of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three others, it is difficult to expect much of this president who was raised in a Muslim country and hung out with communists who hated America.
The White House did not disappoint the expectations even though he did not live up to the strength of others in his office… except possibly Jimmy Carter. After saying he “strongly condemned” the violence in Libya and Egypt, he quickly went on the the core of his message to the American people, “the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others”. While this is is an admirable and high sounding goal, it is really the core Islamic beliefs that bring them to the point where the believe it is their right to destroy Israel and kill Americans. And Obama wants us to respect their religious beliefs. This is the same thinking that led military leaders to decry the Fort Hood tragedy, but quickly add that a greater tragedy would be to permit the event to curtail the diversity they are seeking to implement in our armed forces. Even LBJ would not have permitted a VC soldier in every American platoon in Vietnam.
Eleven years ago our country woke up to the fact that we live in a dangerous world and not every one wished us well. We also woke up to the fact that our enemies did not have borders or national identities. They did have a common identity… an identity that our current leaders refuse to recognize.
September 11 is a day we need to remember the innocence we lost that day. But we need to go beyond our own dismayed reaction and remember the three thousand people who started the day heading off to work, vacations and business trips. Each had their own concerns and tasks that awaited them. None of their plans and tasks were completed as Islamic terrorists who hated America more than they loved their own lives, sent them off into eternity.
The Democrats are beginning the congregation of all sorts of anti-Americans, including a large contingent of Muslims, in Charlotte, NC. For those who would question the terminology, I would suggest they look at the damage this group of miscreants has inflicted on our land and look into their plans for our future.
Their speakers no longer refer to God. The party platform no longer considers Jerusalem to be the capitol of Israel. They are systematically moving to place their government into the position of being the center point of all our lives.
As Florida Senator Marco Rubio spoke to the Republican Convention last week, he told us that Barack Obama was not a bad man, he was just a bad president. We were told that he seems to be a good family man and he was concerned about the people of the country. The problem was that his solutions were just wrong. I’m not sure if he actually believes this, or if the puppet masters behind the scenes who vetted the speeches insisted on this interpretation.
In any case, given the performance, oratory comments and actions of Barack Hussein Obama, I’m not sure that this evaluation is completely accurate. He has said, in support of abortion, that he didn’t want his daughters “penalized” by being forced to have a child should they make a “mistake”. His administration was instrumental in the rise of the barbaric Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and elsewhere. Obama has been very supportive of the practice of homosexuality, which the Creator calls an abomination. His entire economic plan is based on the greed of the non-producers and the envy of those who have succeeded.
While I have always been more interested in positive solutions, there are times when we see things are wrong, we have to speak up most emphatically – sometimes we even have to do something about them. Clint Eastwood slipped in some honest criticism of Obama through in his conversation with an empty chair, which is entirely appropriate – only missing the empty suit that is our President. Some have even criticized the bit of humor and truth as being disrespectful of the President – a president with a profound disrespect for our nation.
The chief diversity officer (we really have one of those) in the US State Department published an article in State Magazine warning readers that some commonly used phrases might be offensive to audiences.
John Robinson suggests that ‘Hold the fort” might offend Native Americans. What if the fort is in Europe? There are a lot of famous ones there. Even if one accepts his reasoning, does the vernacular usage of a phrase mandate continuance of whatever etymological prejudice spawned it? For example, according to Robinson, “rule of thumb” was originally used to gauge acceptability of bruises left on a woman by her husband. Its been some time since America outlawed wife beating. Is there anyone who now connects the “rule of thumb” to spousal abuse?
After reading the comments and spending a good deal of time pondering the vagaries of his verbiage, I feel compelled to say something to Mr. Robinson.
Reports are that all sorts of people are headed to Tampa to make their voices heard at the Republican National Convention. Occupiers and anarchists (perhaps I’m being redundant) are looking to do their best to gum up the works by clogging up the bridges – and there are bridges and causeways for those on the other side of Tampa Bay – blockading intersections and throwing acid filled eggs… and probably destroying other property along the way. They hate our society and want to tear it down.
Then there are the Ron Paul folks who just want to be heard. They feel their message has been stifled and ignored by the party regulars and they, at least, want the satisfaction of being recognized. They are not destructive, in fact, many are doing their best to preserve our nation. Their basic libertarian philosophy of live and let live is one that is antithetical to the destruction of property and imposing themselves on the people around them.
What will happen when these two groups meet on the streets of of the Florida city? Will the Paulites put a damper on the raucous and riotous behavior of the occupiers, or will they get caught up with the lawlessness of the regime supported movement? They tend to be people of better character and want to see the country succeed, but, in the heat of the moment, the mob mentality and the anger at their rejection by the party leadership may get the better of them. Let’s hope not.
I’m sure most everyone has seen bumper stickers that simply say Coexist with the word spelled out using symbols of various religions. It is a pleasant sentiment embraced by people who have no concept of evil in the world… almost invariably the sticker is displayed by liberals who believe that people are basically good and only do bad things because we have not provided the proper conditions for them.
The problem is that it difficult to coexist with people that want to kill you. They want you to die and you want to continue to live. This can be a source of conflict. It is also true that you have a hard time living with people that want to take what you possess. Unless you are willing to give away everything and impoverish yourself, this too can be a source of conflict.
This thinking is most often found in the minds of internationalists who try to understand why people are trying to kill us. The guilt ridden liberals assume that it is something we have done to bring about this hostility. Of course our country has done plenty to annoy petty dictators around the world and even some of our friends. Unfortunately, lately we’ve begun making nice with these dictators and purposely giving our friends the short end of the negotiating stick. The people with the coexistence mindset somehow cannot comprehend that there could basic differences that would cause people to destroy their own lives and the lives of thousands of others by flying planes into buildings strapping bombs to themselves and mingling in crowds.
Washington, DC – Liberty Counsel Action told California state senators that it strongly opposes SB 1172, a bill that bans counselors from helping minors overcome same-sex attractions and puts restrictions on providing adults with “change therapy.” In addition, SB 1172 would impose unprecedented legal liability for counselors who suggest that it is possible to overcome same-sex attractions.
Introduced by State Senator Ted Lieu (D-Torrance) and approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee, SB 1172 relies on a concept that the American Psychological Association (APA) has refuted: homosexuality is an immutable characteristic. In fact, the APA has stated that environmental factors do have a role in a person choosing homosexuality. Despite this research, SB 1172 would codify the assertion that homosexuals cannot become heterosexuals and that efforts to make such a change are harmful. However, no such assertion of harm is made regarding therapy that encourages heterosexuals to experiment with homosexuality, nor does the bill address the harms of counseling people to change their genders.
Mandi Campbell, Liberty Counsel Action Director of Public Policy, said, “If SB 1172 passes, the hands of psychotherapists will be tied and adults struggling with unwanted same-sex attraction will be discouraged from seeking help. What is even more problematic is that the bill prohibits minors from receiving change therapy, even when their parents consent. This would usurp parents’ rights to determine the upbringing and education of their children, a right affirmed by the Supreme Court.”
We have watched our leaders in Washington wobble like Weebles when it comes to making hard decisions. Often, when the choice is obvious, they still can’t bring themselves to stand up for their country. We’ve seen Senator Darryl Issa’s fine work in building the case against Attorney General Eric Holder… but will the Republican leadership in the House of Representatives move forward in dealing with this racist menace to our world? Not on your life!
These people are more interested in their positions and keeping the District of Corruption on an even keel. None are worthy of our predecessors like Thomas Jefferson and Patrick Henry. None would show up in President Kennedy’s book Profiles in Courage. Yet there are some who do show signs of backbone – some who are willing to take positions that will have them pilloried in the press and even, if we follow history, could place them in physical danger.
One such legislator is Virginia Delegate Bob Marshall. One of the functions of the Old Dominion’s House of Delegates is looking into the qualifications of potential judges. As Victoria Cobb from The Family Foundation commented, “The General Assembly is tasked with reviewing and certifying judges. If that is little more than a rubber stamp, it means nothing. It has a duty to block judges deemed unqualified or unfit for the bench.”
[Editors note: this story illustrates the importance of even local elections in selecting the people who hold responsible positions at all levels. Cases like this bring to our consideration of what a law abiding citizen is and how far we can go in following our leaders and what we must do when faced with situations like this.]
Hutchinson, KS – The battle for our religious rights and moral values is now being fought in Hutchinson, Kansas. On May 15, the city council of the small town, just northwest of Wichita, will vote on whether to add “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to the list of other protected classes, such as race, age, and disability. If passed, this new law will destroy the “free exercise of religion” in Hutchinson:
First Baptist Church on Main Street will be required to rent their facilities for drag-queen parties and homosexual “commitment ceremonies.”
Abundant Life Childcare, northeast of town, will be forced to hire cross-dressers to supervise children.
“These are the times that try men’s souls” – Thomas Paine
On April 20, 2012, a 15 year old black boy name Alton Hayes, and one of his friends came up behind a 19 year old white man, robbed him and them violently beat him up, kicking him repeated in the head with their boots. When arrested, the black boy told police he did it because he was angry over the Trayvon Martin killing.
In Kansas City, Missouri, on April 15 two black youths followed a 13 year old white child home, then grabbed him, threw him to the ground, poured gasoline on him and lit the liquid with a match. The boy suffered first and second degree burns on his arms, torso, and face and his lungs were seared from breathing the flames.
On April 24 in Mobile, Alabama a gang of around 20 blacks attacked a white man, Matthew Owens, on his front porch, beating him with paint cans, bricks, and metal pipes. As the gang of blacks left the scene one of them was heard to say, “This is justice for Trayvon.” The victim is currently in critical condition. The police have not made any arrests so far.
The Federal Department of Justice was quick to investigate the Trayvon Martin shooting as a hate crime but have said absolutely nothing about these incidents of black on white hate crimes. The Black Panthers put a $10,000 bounty on George Zimmerman, a “white” man and the DOJ has said nor done anything about it. President Obama was quick to comment on the Trayvon Martin shooting, condemning it but instead of trying to calm down the anger in the black community he has said absolutely nothing about the unprovoked and violent crimes committed by blacks because of the Martin shooting, thereby encouraging such action through his silence.
Abe Lincoln said it best, “What is morally wrong cannot be politically correct.” Yet the exponential pornification of our culture is contributing both directly and indirectly to the epidemic of child sexual abuse, and unfortunately, certain segments of our government are turning a blind eye.
The U.S. spends trillions in military engagements overseas to prevent, protect and defend, and yet, research indicates that in our own country, 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 6 boys will be sexually victimized before adulthood (the majority are victimized by family members or someone whom they know and trust). Illegal adult pornography (i.e. obscenity) remains unprosecuted, and every child with unrestricted Internet access is just one click away from viewing this material. In a recent study, 53% of boys and 28% of girls, ages 12-15, reported using hard-core, adult illegal pornography. Additionally, law enforcement is grossly underfunded to prosecute predators, and the $3 billion child pornography industry remains one of the fastest growing businesses online. Over 200,000 rape kits remain unprocessed, and over 100,000 registered sex offenders are “lost in the system”, allowing rapists and child molesters to repeatedly abuse and expand their wake of exploitation.
A new movie called “Trust”, Directed by David Schwimmer, should serve as a wakeup call to our nation to open its eyes to the very real problem of child sexual abuse in this country. “Trust” documents the raw physical, social and emotional toll on 14-year-old Annie Cameron (Liana Liberato) as she is groomed online and later victimized during an offline meeting with “Charlie”, whom she initially believes to be a 16-year-old boy.
View this video, then view it again… and think about what is really going as leaders of the United States and Russia conspire against the American people. The US president is telling the Russian leader that they should be patient. He is telling him that after he is re-elected he would be more flexible in working with our traditional enemy and selling out our God-given rights and traditional allies.
This is something we need to consider, and many see this as just one more indication that Obama is not suited to sit in the oval office any more than he was suited to sit in the Senate. Those of us who care about the security of our nation and the safety of our citizens, as well as the safety of our friends who have stood with us over the years should be outraged at such betrayal. Many of us see the danger and are speaking up and doing what we can to see that the re-election he seeks is denied him by the American people.
I’m sure I’ll get all sorts of negative reaction to this, but there are some things that need to be discussed. Initial reports by the formerly mainstream media and later reports on the death of Florida youth, Trayvon Martin, simply do not match… which leads us to wonder what actually happened that awful night. It seems that Mark Twain knew what he was talking about when he said, “If you don’t read the newspaper, you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper, you are misinformed.”
Initial television reports told the story of witnesses seeing and hearing Neighborhood Watch member George Zimmerman being beaten by Martin before the shooting. Later reports bypassed that story and just reported that Zimmerman shot and unarmed young man. It’s hard to tell what actually happened when those telling the story don’t seem to have agreement as to what actually happened.
It is interesting that the media has no problem shaping a story to meet their particular slant or viewpoint. For example, the generally accepted picture everyone has seen is of a clean cut, smiling 14 year old, rather than the picture of the gang banger that supposedly came from the victim’s Facebook page. It also goes the other way, as they tend to show a five year old booking photo of the shooter rather than anything recent that reflects his current life situation.
If you like the copyrighted content of Political Christian and would like to repost, republish or email the material, permission is granted for any article attributed to Larry Miller provided 1) there is a link back to this site and 2) there is no subscription fee and no paid advertising.
For other circumstances and other contributors, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org or follow links that may be provided.