While this cancellation has made national headlines and must be another notch for the Anti-Christian Liberties Union, we wish someone in the know would write a story about what kind of parents let their mentally disturbed daughter do this to an entire community.
A northern Mississippi school district will not be hosting a high school prom this spring after a lesbian student sought to attend with her girlfriend and wear a tuxedo.
The Itawamba County school district's board decided Wednesday to drop the prom because of what it called recent distractions but without specifically mentioning the girl's request, which was backed by the American Civil Liberties Union.
A Christian student in the Los Angeles Community College District is carrying his free-speech case to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Jonathan Lopez had an assignment in a public speaking class and was required to give an informative speech on any topic. Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) attorney David Hacker tells OneNewsNow that Lopez chose to speak about his Christian beliefs. "And during that speech, when he mentioned that marriage is between a man and a woman according to his Christian beliefs, the professor called him this horrible name, refused to let him finish the assignment, and told other students in the class, 'If you're offended, you can leave,'" Hacker explains.
When no students left, the professor dismissed the class. Hacker adds that Lopez is an "A" student -- "but the problem is he never got a grade on that informative speech, and in fact, the professor wrote on his evaluation form, 'Ask God what your grade is.'"
The ADF attorney argues that demonstrates the hostility towards religion on many college campuses. The lower court in Los Angeles issued a preliminary injunction against the school, saying its speech code -- allowing administrators to punish Lopez's "hateful propaganda" -- is unconstitutional. That has been appealed to the Ninth Circuit.
Battle looms in Supreme Court over 'gay' activist harassmentFrom WorldNetDaily
By Drew Zahn
A battle is set to begin in the U.S. Supreme Court, as backers of traditional marriage hope to fend off a law that would make their names and addresses public and, therefore, make them prime targets for homosexual activists intent on bullying them into silence.
The case calls into question whether voters have protected free speech and anonymity rights in signing petitions and ballot initiatives or whether states must release signatories' names and addresses as a matter of public record.
With reported cases of bullying, organized boycotts and threats of violence against the signers of traditional marriage initiatives in several states already – and homosexual activists pledging to make lists of signatories public and searchable online – lawyers at the American Center for Law and Justice are concerned that voters may grow fearful of reprisal should they sign a petition seeking to restrict marriage to one man and one woman. That fear, the ACLJ is arguing in a brief filed this week before the Court, is exactly the kind of political and voter intimidation that the Constitution should protect against.
Dutch Catholics are organizing a petition drive in support of a parish priest who refused to distribute Communion to homosexual activists, and criticizing the bishop who apparently pressured the priest to compromise his position. The petition, organized by the magazine Catholica praises the pastor, Father Luc Buyen, but laments that he "has been attacked by homosexuals and then left in the cold by his own Church." The protest criticizes Bishop Antonius Hurkmans of Den Bosch, who said that everyone should be admitted to Communion, on the assumption that the faithful are responsible for examining their own consciences before doing so. That statement prompted homosexual activists to lift their call for demonstrations at the parish, where scores of protestors-- some wearing fright wigs-- had attended Mass last Sunday, preparing to present themselves for Communion in defiance of the priest's directive.
Source(s): these links will take you to other sites, in a new window.
A new Lutheran denomination is being formed for congregations opposed to the homosexual-friendly policy of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. The separation has come about as a result of the ELCA agreeing to a resolution affirming that it is acceptable for a Lutheran to live an unrepentant, homosexual lifestyle.
It is interesting how the sodomites seek to desecrate that which is most sacred in carrying out their political theater. We commend and thank the good Dutch priest involved in the following story who knows there can be no communion or "fellowship" with those who not only "walk in darkness," but celebrate it and want us to call it "light." We will never call dark light, and evil good.
If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not live according to the truth; but if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin.
If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.
A Dutch Catholic priest chose not to distribute Communion to the congregation, apparently fearing desecration, as hundreds of homosexual activists crowded into a parish church in Den Bosch. The demonstrators were protesting the church's decision to deny Communion to a prominent local homosexual.
Source(s): these links will take you to other sites, in a new window.
Perkins Expresses Disappointment and Concern over Rescinded Invitation
In October, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins received an invitation to speak at a National Prayer Luncheon on February 25 at Andrews Air Force Base outside Washington, D.C. on the theme "Getting Back to the Basics." Perkins, who is also an ordained minister and a veteran of the Marine Corps, accepted this invitation to assist members of the armed forces "refocus on these Divine and 'basic' principles."
However, in his State of the Union address on January 27, President Obama called on Congress to lift all restrictions on service in the military by open homosexuals. Perkins and FRC spoke out against this policy proposal and urged Congress to retain the current law which excludes homosexuals from openly serving in the military.
On January 29, Perkins received a letter from the chaplain's office at Andrews AFB rescinding the invitation to speak at the prayer luncheon, citing FRC statements "which are incompatible in our role as military members who serve our elected officials and our Commander in Chief."
In response, Perkins today issued the following statement:
"As one who took the oath to defend and protect our freedoms, I am disappointed that I've been denied the opportunity to speak to members of the military, in a non-political way, solely because I exercised my free speech rights in a different forum. It's ironic that this blacklisting should occur because I called for the retention and enforcement of a valid federal statute.
"I am very concerned, however, that this merely foreshadows the serious threat to religious liberty that would result from repeal of the current military eligibility law. Such legislation would not merely open the military to homosexuals. It would result in a zero-tolerance policy toward those who disapprove of homosexual conduct.
"Military chaplains would bear the heaviest burden. Would their sermons be censored to prevent them from preaching on biblical passages which describe homosexual conduct as a sin? Would they remain free to counsel soldiers troubled by same-sex attractions about the spiritual and psychological resources available to overcome those attractions? Any chaplain who holds to the millennia-old tradition of Judeo-Christian sexual morality could be denied promotion, or even be forced out of the military altogether.
"I understand the untenable situation that this creates for chaplains and the men and women in uniform. I urge Congress, the President, and the top leadership of our military to place the constitutional guarantee of religious liberty ahead of the fashionable political correctness of a special interest group."
French homosexualist demonstrators had planned to have a "kiss in" in front of Notre Dame cathedral in Paris this Valentine's day. But in response to the protests of a group of young French Catholics and patriots, it was moved away from the church of Our Lady.
The kiss-in was ostensibly meant to combat “homophobia.” The organizer of the kiss-in, Arthur Vauthier, had nevertheless said that it was a "way to challenge the Church, to question the Church on the question of love and marriage between gays and between lesbians." He had furthermore boasted that he was "not afraid of a backlash."
A number of Catholic and nationalist websites and blogs called on Catholics to "respond with courtesy and firmness to the provocation." French Action called on people to help resist the demonstration, stating that "France is not a nightclub."
The police then advised the demonstration's organizers to change its location because of a possible clash between the homosexualists and the Catholics. The event was moved to Saint-Michel, nearby.
Some homosexualist demonstrators, however, decided to go ahead with their plan anyway.
But a group of roughly 200 young Catholics had gathered by the time the homosexualists decided to start kissing each other in front of Notre Dame. The group of Catholics started shouting at the demonstrators at which point the police stepped in between the two groups and moved the gay activists away from the church. The following video shows young Catholics, after moving the demonstrators away from Notre Dame, chanting "Habemus Papam!" – or “We have a pope.”
“Strangely, the extremists of the homosexual cause do not assemble to the Grand Mosque of Paris. However, it is in Muslim countries (that apply Sharia [law]) that homosexuals are executed!” From LifeSiteNews
By Hilary White
A French homosexualist organization will be staging a “kiss-in” at Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris this Sunday, St. Valentine’s day. Dozens of homosexuals are expected to turn up and kiss for five minutes at 2 p.m., after services at the cathedral.
Organizer Arthur Vautier told a Paris homosexual magazine, Tetu, that the demonstration is meant to “ challenge the Church to question religion on the issue of love and marriage between gays and between lesbians.”
“We were probably over a hundred at the last kiss-in,” Vautier said.
The “Catholic Culture City” blog called on Christians to “respond firmly and courteously” to the “new provocation by the gay lobby and suspected complicity of the media.”
One French blogger noted that the choice of targets is selective. “Strangely, the extremists of the homosexual cause do not assemble to the Grand Mosque of Paris. However, it is in Muslim countries (that apply Sharia [law]) that homosexuals are executed!”
Vautier, however, said his group does not “fear a backlash” from Christians.
Frank Kameny, a “pioneering” homosexual activist who was honored by President Obama and his administration, says the God of the Bible is a “sinful homophobic bigot” who needs to “repent of his sinful homophobia.”
Kameny made the assertions about the Judeo-Christian God in a letter to Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality, October 13, 2009:
“Your God of Leviticus (and of the whole Bible) is clearly a sinful homophobic bigot. He should repent of his sinful homophobia. He should atone for that sin. And he should seek forgiveness for the pain and suffering which his sinful homophobia has needlessly inflicted upon gay people for the past 4000 years.” wrote Kameny to LaBarbera. “It is not homosexuality which is always wrong, immoral, and sinful. It is homophobia, including the homophobia of your god himself which is wrong, immoral, and sinful. And so your god is a sinner….”
An astronomer who was fired from his federal government job in 1957 due to his homosexuality, Kameny led the first public homosexual protest in America (over his firing), in 1965. Kameny, who gained notoriety with his aggressive, counter-cultural slogan “Gay is Good,” was a leader of the organized homosexual activist campaign to pressure the American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality from the list of mental disorders (which succeeded when the APA capitulated in 1973).
On June 17, 2009, Kameny received the official White House pen from President Obama in a White House signing ceremony enacting Obama’s executive order providing domestic partner benefits for certain federal employees.
Later, at a June 29 White House speech honoring “gay pride month,” President Obama praised Kameny, saying, “we are proud of you, Frank, and we are grateful to you for your leadership.”
Kameny was also honored by John Berry, Obama’s openly homosexual Director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), in a special ceremony June 24, 2009 sponsored by the OPM “gay” employees organization. There, Kameny received the Theodore Roosevelt Award, the OPM’s highest honor, “For More Than a Half-Century of Leadership in the Struggle for Civil Rights.” Berry also issued a formal U.S. government apology to Kameny for his firing over 50 years ago.
Responding to Kameny’s letter asserting that God needs to repent, AFTAH’s LaBarbera said:
“Of course Frank Kameny’s outrageous statements about God are completely backwards: it is Frank who is the stubborn sinner who needs to repent. Thankfully, it is never too late for sinners to turn away from their sins and humbly accept God’s forgiveness through Jesus Christ.
“However, in one sense at least Kameny is forthright about how his homosexuality-celebrating ideology stands diametrically opposed to God’s plan for mankind, as revealed in the Bible. Unfortunately for Frank, he has no authority to judge sin and morality; that is the province of Almighty God alone.”
At about 3:00pm on Wednesday afternoon the New York State Senate voted to overwhelmingly reject legislation that would have legalized same-sex "marriage."
The measure, which would have amended New York State's Domestic Partnership Law, failed by a broad margin of 24 in favor with 38 against.
The Senate vote effectively means that same-sex "marriage" is dead in New York: a resounding victory for pro-family advocates in the state, and a heavy defeat for Gov. David Paterson and Democratic leaders, who were looking to deliver same-sex "marriage" advocates their first victory after their latest defeat in Maine.
Just moments before the vote, Sen. Tom Duane, the chief sponsor of the same-sex "marriage" bill, confidently told members of the Senate that he was looking forward to not just being "an old gay" but soon a "married gay."
However, those anticipations were dashed by a coalition of Democrats, who joined Sen. Ruben Diaz, Jr. (D-NY 32), the leader of the fight against same-sex "marriage" in the Senate, in voting their consciences with Republicans against the bill.
Debate began after a short noon recess with Sen. Duane arguing that this "legislation would provide me and tens of thousands of other New Yorkers equal rights in New York State."
"It would make me equal in every way to everyone else in this chamber," declared Duane in his brief opening remarks.
In the final speech before the vote, Sen. Duane once more encouraged his colleagues to vote on same-sex "marriage" saying, "It's always the time to be on the right side of history!"
Only Sen. Diaz spoke on the floor of the Senate against same-sex "marriage" and he told the Senate that it was a supreme "irony" that the same gay lobby, which fought so hard and spent an enormous amount of money to wrest control of the Senate from the GOP in order to get a bill on same-sex "marriage," now "is depending on them to make this happen."
"The reality is that it has been the Republican Party and their traditional values, and the Republican Party with their moral values, and the Republican Party with their family values, that has been for years and years what has kept the values in this whole nation alive," declared Diaz. "And now they are being asked to throw away these values."
Diaz mentioned that adherents of the world's major religions - not just Evangelicals - oppose same-sex "marriage," including Jews, Muslims, and Catholics. Diaz specifically praised those Catholic bishops who signed the Manhattan Declaration as a testament of their opposition to same-sex "marriage."
"The majority of the people has opposed their will to same-sex 'marriage,'" said Diaz, pointing out that in 31 states where same-sex "marriage" was put to a vote, the people voted against it. By contrast, he continued, same-sex "marriage" was legalized in three states by court order, and by legislation in two states that have no right of referendum.
Diaz proposed that instead the Senate should let New Yorkers decide on same-sex "marriage" and appealed to the Republicans once again to hold fast to their principles and vote that the people, not the legislature decide the fate of marriage.
"Remember your rules, remember your values, remember your family values, traditional values, moral values. Go back to the defense of your traditional values, join me a Democrat, join me a Hispanic, join me a black, join me a Puerto Rican, and join me in bringing a referendum to the people," said Diaz.
However the rest of the speeches proceeded from Democrats speaking out in favor of the bill.
Sen. Malcolm Smith, President Pro Tempore of the Senate, told the Senate that at stake with same-sex "marriage" was "an individual's right to feel good about themselves."
"For the first time, all men and women will be created equal," said Sen. Eric Schneiderman, Deputy Majority Leader (D-NY 34) adding that, "This law will expand the central American ideal of equality."
Sen. Eric Adams (D-NY 20) politely accused Sen. Diaz of not speaking "from his head." Adams compared banning gay marriage to "reaching back to the most ugliest [sic] period of America," when states like Virginia had laws banning interracial marriages until the 1967 US Supreme Court decision in Loving v. Virginia.The senator also told his colleagues that,
"When I walk through these doors, my bible stays out.
"The statement drew a sharp rebuke from Sen. Diaz, who stated that given the crime and state of society in America, "That is the wrong statement to send." Diaz, a Hispanic Evangelical minister, urged Senators to remember their Bibles before voting.
One of my wisest brothers in Christ must surely be Terry Nelson at the Abbey-Roads blog. Following is his post on plans by homosexualists to "out" closeted homosexual priests and bishops. Were such efforts aimed at the defiantly heterodox, we would rejoice that "all things work together for good to them that love God." Indeed, the sodomites would be performing a service to the Church in shining a light on the corruption. But invariably, as Terry points out:
Many same sex attracted men have struggled to live according to the teachings of the Church, and as all of us sinners, many fall - and rise again. Priests are not perfect, to preach the truth about homosexuality is not hypocrisy - even if a priest fails to live up to his vows from time to time. If he repents and strives to live accordingly, in time he will be victorious. From Abbey-Roads
Activists in D.C. intend to begin outing closeted homosexual priests and bishops in retaliation for Archbishop Wuerl's anti-same-sex marriage efforts as well as a USCCB pastoral letter, which has been perceived as an 'anti-gay attack' - when in actual fact it is a defense of marriage, defining Catholic teaching on issues of faith and morals. From the website,
ChurchOuting.org press release: .
ChurchOuting.org is a clearinghouse for reports of priests who are openly gay men in social settings yet professionally closeted in their parishes. The campaign will also accept reports of heterosexual priests who are involved in romantic or sexual relationships, yet support the Archbishop’s efforts to harm lesbian and gay families. - Source .
Our local gay activist Michael Bayly joins his support to the organization's efforts: .
I should say from the start that I support efforts to out the hypocrisy of those Roman Catholic bishops and priests who live secretive gay lives while at the same time either publicly support the official anti-gay rhetoric and efforts of the church’s clerical leadership to strip gay people of civil rights protections, or remain silent in the face of such un-Christlike behavior. Indeed, I resonate with ChurchOuting.org’s founder Phil Attey’s hope that this campaign in Washington, D.C., will “inspire similar campaigns in every archdiocese across the country.” - Source .
Nothing new. .
Didn't Act Up launch a campaign to out closeted public figures way when? Most recently Larry Craig pretty much outed himself when he was caught with his pants down in a MPLS airport. Gay activists like Michael say that type of behavior wouldn't happen if everyone was out and being gay was on equal terms with heterosexuality. In response I like to cite people such as George Michael who seems to prefer that type of sexual adventure even though he lives in a domestic partnership - he famously and unashamedly defended such behavior saying, "It is what gay people do." Yet activists maintain such sleazy behavior is motivated by shame - although in the case of closeted 'bi-sexual' predators who may struggle against such sins, it is just hypocrisy. .
Washington gay activists may be placing all their bets on these tactics of detraction since they appear to have worked so well in the Church of England:
Furthermore, "outing" (or the threat of "outing") may help persuade some homophobic closet gays to stop doing damage to other gay people, and thereby prevent considerable suffering. It can also very effectively pressure homophobic institutions to reconsider their anti-gay policies..
This is what happened when OutRage! named ten Anglican Bishops last November. Suddenly, for the first time ever, the Church of England began high-level dialogue with the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement. In January, the Bishops held a previously unscheduled re-examination of their stance on homosexuality, which resulted in a strongly-worded condemnation of homophobic discrimination and anti-gay violence. Church officials have privately admitted that none of these developments would have occurred if OutRage! had not "provoked a crisis" by naming the Bishops. .
However, perhaps the most significant effect of calling on the Bishops to "Tell The Truth!" is that the whole homophobic establishment is now aware that "outing" is not just an idle threat. OutRage! has ripped open the closet doors of the Church of England. We can, if we decide to, also expose hypocritical and homophobic closet gays in politics, business, the military, judiciary and the police. These people now understand that all those who abuse their power to harm other lesbian and gay people are potential targets. This will probably encourage at least some of them to think twice about being homophobic in the future. - Source .
I thought blackmail was illegal? .
Well, it is certainly not honorable. I suppose all is fair in love and war, and never forget, this is war. Consider as well that 'the sin of the Gentiles is they lack charity', therefore these kind of threats should not surprise anyone. 'Nothing is hidden that will not be revealed,' right? .
."Fornicator I always was, heretic I never was." - St. Andrew Wourters, Gorcum Martyr .
The fact is, many same sex attracted men have struggled to live according to the teachings of the Church, and as all of us sinners, many fall - and rise again. Priests are not perfect, to preach the truth about homosexuality is not hypocrisy - even if a priest fails to live up to his vows from time to time. If he repents and strives to live accordingly, in time he will be victorious. On the other hand, perhaps there are 'bad' priests living duplicitous lives, and exposure could perhaps bring them to repentance? I don't know. I do know that some priests will suffer for the faith if this happens. Priests wrongly accused, priests who have reformed their lives, and priests actively struggling, as well as priests who reject their homosexual inclination and who have never acted on it. Priests and Bishops who preach the truth despite their failings are not hypocrites. .
If indeed there are active homosexualist priests living duplicitous lives, I strongly suspect their lifestyle is already known by many of those around them - think liberal priests in liberal parishes - therefore I suspect such outings will have little to no effect. Publicising it will only confirm that Perez Hilton is not some odd aberration of gay culture, but typifies an essential weakness of the immature homosexual personality: to complain, to attack, to wallow in self-pity, to gossip, to detract, to calumniate, to mock, to scorn. .
After announcing the "Rally for Religious Free Speech" an event to challenge the recent Hate Crime Bill signed by President Obama, Rev. Gary Cass of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission, a sponsor of the event, received a threatening e-mail saying, "I'll be in Washington on the 16th and I know what you look like."
"Because of the recent domestic terrorism at Ft Hood and the documented escalation of threats of violence by homosexual activists against Christians, we are taking all threats very seriously and reporting all such threats to the FBI," said Dr. Gary Cass.
In the fallout after Maine's voters recently rejected homosexual marriage, Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality has documented the increasing violent threats against Christians. Below is an exchange on a homosexual activist website reported by World Net Daily.
"All it will take is a small group of radical zealots who are willing to kill for their cause," "Fritz" wrote. "This happens in all cases where people are oppressed and lack representation. Our president must wake up and prevent this from happening. Otherwise, we will end up like Israel and Palestine. We will have gay and lesbian people strapping bombs to their chests and blowing up churches." "Tex" responded, "You say this like it's a bad thing? Maybe a bit of well organized terrorism is just what we need, er, I mean 'civil disobedience.'"
"We will not let the homosexual activists intimidate us," said Dr. Cass. "It just makes us that much more determined to stand for biblical truth and to pray for God to grant them repentance and find forgiveness in Jesus Christ."
The Rally for Religious Free Speech will occur on Monday, November 16th at 1:30 in front of the Department of Justice in Washington DC. Ministers from various denominations will be preaching the biblical truth about homosexual sin.
The rally is intended to assert the right to preach in the public square the truth about homosexuality because the hate crime bill has had a very chilling effect on religious free speech. Under the bill ministers can be investigated and convicted by the Federal Government for incitement to hate crimes simply by preaching the Bible.
"We do not expect to be arrested, but we will not let this vague, unconstitutional law stand unchallenged. Will US Attorney General Holder stop a peacefully assembled group of clergy from preaching the Bible?" asked Cass.
The event will start with a press conference and a letter will be presented to AG Holder to express the multiple constitutional concerns the hate bill raises. Matt Staver of Liberty Council will be representing the group. After the event in front of the DOJ a prayer vigil will be held outside of the Human Rights Commission.
Star Parker has spoken out on the lunacy of creating a special class of victims based on sexual perversion. The founder and president of the Coalition for Urban Renewal and Education (CURE), has released the following statement:
"President Barack Obama has signed into law the Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Actually, he signed into law the 2010 National Defense Authorization Act tacked onto which was the hate crimes legislation.
Sen. Harry Reid, our brave Democratic majority leader, slipped the hate crimes bill into the defense authorization bill to avoid having to have our senators consider the controversial hate crimes bill on its own.
It's for good reason that our Democratic legislators wanted to hide under a rock while passing this terrible piece of legislation. It may help them with the far left wing of their party. But weakening and damaging our country is not something to be proud of. And that is exactly what this new hate crime law does.
The bill adds extra penalties to violent crimes when they are deemed motivated by gender, sexual orientation, or disabilities. It's the first major expansion of hate crimes legislation originally passed in 1968, targeted then to crimes aimed at race, color, religion, and national origin.
After signing this new law, Obama celebrated it by saying that in this nation we should "embrace our differences."
But law isn't about embracing our differences. It is about providing equal and non-arbitrary protection to all citizens.
Equal protection for every individual American under the law is what the 14th Amendment to our Constitution, passed after the Civil War, guarantees. That this nation takes this guarantee seriously -- that there are no classes of individuals treated differently under the law -- has been a justifiable obsession of blacks.
A society in which all life is not valued the same, where murder of one citizen is not the same as the murder of another citizen, is a horror that black Americans have known too well.
So it is a particular irony that this major expansion of the politicization of our law has been signed by our first black president.
What could it possibly mean that the penalty for the same act of violence -- for murder -- may be different depending on what might be deemed to be the motivation?
Can you imagine a football game where the penalty for roughing the passer is 20 yards rather than 15 yards if the referee concludes that the violence perpetrated was motivated because the quarterback was homosexual?
Is it not a sign of our own pathology that we now have codified that it is worse to murder a homosexual than someone who has committed adultery, even with your husband or wife, or who has slandered or robbed? Isn't the point murder?
Can we really believe that someone capable of murder is less likely to do so if the victim is a homosexual and the penalties are greater?
It should be clear that hate crime law has nothing to do with improving our law but rather with creating favored political classes. It is something that should be hateful to everyone who cares about a free society, and particularly hateful to those, such as blacks, who have been victimized by politicization of law.
How about the sad and pathetic recent murder of a 16-year-old Christian black honor student in Chicago by four teenage thugs, also black?
A hate crime?
Black on black homicides are tearing up our inner cities. Hate crimes?
The social breakdown that produces the disproportionate violence in black America is the product of the same moral relativism and politicization of law that has produced hate crime bills.
We already have a source, which instructs against murder and to love your neighbor as yourself.
But this has been banned from our schools and our public spaces.
So once again, in what is becoming our Godless nation, we mistake the disease for the cure."
The visit and threat of a "hate crime" charge by police to a 67 year-old U.K. pensioner and devout Christian grandmother, has garnered outrage from all corners of Britain, and has even been criticised by the head of Britain's leading homosexualist lobby group.
Mrs. Pauline Howe was told by two police officers who visited her home that she may have committed a "hate incident" simply for having written a letter to her local council complaining about the local Gay Pride parade.
Mrs. Howe says she is considering suing the police, after enduring what she described as a "frightening and intimidating" interrogation. She is seeking legal advice from the Christian Institute, a leading UK Christian lobby and advocacy group.
In a video interview, Howe said it is "quite obvious" that the matter is one of an attack by police on freedom of religious expression and belief. "Our freedoms as bible-believing Christians have just been squashed now and the authority of God's word as well. We're not allowed to express our biblical evangelical beliefs anymore without being frightened."
She sent the letter after she was harassed and subjected to sexually explicit verbal attacks when she joined a group of other Christians handing out leaflets at the Gay Pride event on July 25th. In her letter, Mrs. Howe said, "I and other Christians present are not attempting to prevent those who engage in this offensive behaviour from doing so in the privacy of their own homes.
"It is the public display of such indecency on the streets of Norwich which is so offensive to God and to many Norwich residents," she wrote. "It is shameful that this small, but vociferous lobby should be allowed such a display unwarranted by the minimal number of homosexuals."
Mrs. Howe's letter garnered a response from Bridget Buttinger, the council's deputy chief executive, who told her that she could be facing hate crime charges. The council reported the letter to the Norfolk Constabulary, who judged after their interview that no crime had been committed.
The issue has provoked a sudden storm of media attention after ITV's Anglia News ran the story last night. ITV quoted an organiser of the Gay Pride march supporting the police, saying, "There are some points of view that are too hateful to be said."
Homosexualist activists have objected to Mrs. Howe's use of the biblically based term "sodomites" and her assertion that their "perverted sexual practices" spread sexually transmitted diseases. But Ben Summerskill, head of Britain's leading homosexualist activist group Stonewall, called the police response "disproportionate." Andrew Pierce, a commentator for the Daily Telegraph and a homosexual, said, "What kind of society have we become when the peaceful expression of a religious belief can bring police knocking at the door?"
Norfolk police have issued a statement saying, "We will investigate all alleged hate incidents" and called their response "proportionate." A police spokesman said, "If it has come into our intelligence and been reported to us as a crime then we have to investigate."
Mike Judge of the Christian Institute, said, "Whether people agree or disagree with Mrs. Howe's views, everyone who cares about freedom should be alarmed at the police action."
"For democracy to survive people must be free to express their beliefs, yes even unpopular beliefs, to government bodies without fear of a knock at the door from the police. It's not a crime to be a Christian, but it increasingly feels like it."
Ed West, a journalist and commentator for the Daily Telegraph, wrote that Judge has a point. West pointed to the numerous cases of people, "all Christians (generally Evangelicals)," who have been "questioned by the police over objecting to homosexuality."
"It is a part of a wider trend of illiberalism across Europe that has taken place in the past decade."
"This soft totalitarianism does not come with gulags or death camps, but rather the petty harassment of individuals by the authorities," West added.
In light of the tragic passage of hate crimes legislation to include those engaging in sinful behavior as a special and protected class of victims, the following is particularly meaningful.
1. Natural Law is ignored, undermined or made to look stupid by particular instances where it seems not apply.
2. Subsequently religious and civil authorities have their laws questioned because they are 'too strict' too 'black and white', 'unworkable' or 'lacking in compassion'.
3. Relativism is therefore introduced. An understanding gradually grows that 'there are no objective rule' that apply to all people at all times.
4. Individualism is the next step. 'I guess I have to decide what is right for me in my situation.'
5. Sentimentalism: People who live in a sinful situation demand that they not be judged. They deserve compassion and understanding. They are nice people really...but they have a problem. They're sick. They're wounded. Who are you to judge?
6. Dialogue is demanded. "You need to listen to us and to our stories. Then you will understand we are just like you."
7. Once sympathy is won, the goalposts are moved. Now they are not 'sick' or 'wounded' they're just 'different'. They expect to be accepted despite their 'differences'.
8. Equal rights are expected by those who are acting against God's law. "We are not asking you to approve us. We are simply asking you to tolerate a difference of opinion. Simply allow us to be who we are!"
9. Equal rights are demanded. Legislation and lobbying and protests are now in order. The pressure group for sin starts to get aggressive. They do so out of 'hurt' and 'woundedness.' Once they get their 'rights' (they claim) they will be happy and won't be so aggressive.
10. Tolerance being won, they will not stop. They now demand not only that you tolerate, but that you approve. They've moved from being 'sick' or 'wounded' or 'disabled' by their condition to tolerance, and now they proclaim their condition to be 'good'. As Thomas More was not allowed to remain silent on the King's 'great matter' but had to approve, so the presssure group insists on approval.
11. What was once tolerated now becomes mandatory. Society must integrate the new morality into every level--right down to schools and churches and scout groups. Everyone must adopt the new morality or suffer.
12. Persecution of those who resist.
13. Devil's real happy.
This process happens on an individual level, a family level, a community level and a societal level. The bigger the level the longer it takes, and for it to take effect at the societal, community and family level it must first work on the individual level.
This means you and I must watch for the signs in our own moral life and be alert. Any of us can go down this path, and any of us may be victims of those who are already well down the path of evil and darkness.
On Thursday, the U.S. Senate passed a hate crimes billthat Christian leaders have warned for years could greatly infringe on the rights of those who speak too loudly about their religious views. Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel agrees with most observers that President Obama will sign the measure -- adding that the president desires to "throw a bone to homosexual activists because they have been breathing down his neck...and this is a way to hold them off."
Barber views the legislation as something akin to a muzzle. "Unfortunately, it places Christians -- people of faith, people who have traditional values relative to sexual immorality...in an untenable position," says the attorney. He notes that several years ago, a similar law in Pennsylvania resulted in the arrest of 11 Christians who were presenting the gospel at a Philadelphia homosexual rally. Barber goes on to say that the federal bill "will chill religious liberty and free speech -- and that is its intended purpose, not to protect anybody from hate crimes." And as for pastors? "There is a very weak exemption in [the bill] which is totally illusory, and a religious exemption is not going to protect pastors," responds Barber. "Renegade prosecutors and politically correct leftists in positions of authority can subjectively determine what is or is not a hate crime." And then move on to prosecution, he adds. Barber explains that Liberty Counsel intends to challenge the constitutionality of the hate crimes legislation.
Last week a bill was introduced to the U.S. House of Representatives proposing federal-level punishment for states that ban homosexual couples and non-married individuals from adopting children.
Touted as a measure to help more children find homes, Democratic California Rep. Pete Stark's "Every Child Deserves a Family Act" recommends that states allowing foster care placements only into married heterosexual households be deprived of federal child welfare funds.
The law would have an impact on Utah, Florida, Arkansas, Nebraska and Mississippi, which either explicitly restrict adoption to heterosexual couples, or restrict it to married couples while not recognizing same-sex "marriage."
"It is unacceptable that states are denying children healthy, loving homes simply because of a potential parent's sexual orientation or marital status," said Rep. Stark in a press release last week. "The Every Child Deserves a Family Act ensures that the best interests of children are the only criteria for finding adoptive and foster parents."
The bill reads: "In order to open more homes to foster children, child welfare agencies should work to eliminate sexual orientation, gender identification, and marital status discrimination and bias in adoption and foster care recruitment, selection, and placement procedures." It also authorizes those who claim their bid for adoption was compromised by such factors to sue in a federal court.
The measure is slated for the House Ways & Means committee, whose website shows no hearings scheduled for the bill. Stark is the bill's only sponsor.
Major homosexualist lobbies such as the Human Rights Commission have not commented on the bill.
Yesterday evening Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed SB 54 and SB 572, both authored by Senator Mark Leno, into law. SB 54 requires California to grant all the privileges and rights of marriage to same-sex marriages performed outside of California prior to the passage of Proposition 8 last year. SB 572 requires the governor to declare every May 22 Harvey Milk Day in California.
"This is tragic news for California families," state Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Institute. "The governor has chosen to completely undermine the will of the people -- the millions of Californians who have twice stated that they intend for only traditional marriage to be recognized in our state. By signing SB 54, the governor thumbs his nose at the initiative process and the voters who trust that their vote means something.
Last year the governor vetoed a bill identical to SB 572 that would have declared Harvey Milk Day in California. In his veto message, the governor cited the local influence of Milk in San Francisco, stating that Milk's recognition should not be mandated statewide.
"We don't know why the governor suddenly changed his mind and decided to impose a radical social agenda in every classroom," stated England. "One possible explanation is the influence of the governor's Hollywood friends. After a biopic on Milk received Academy Award recognition earlier this year, Hollywood political activists began lobbying the governor to sign the resurrected Harvey Milk Day bill. It seems that the governor places more value in the opinion of his Hollywood friends and their values than the values of the people who voted him into office."
The Harvey Milk Day bill was so controversial that the governor dedicated a phone line in his office to calls regarding Harvey Milk Day.
"The people of California have clearly spoken out against same-sex marriage and Harvey Milk Day, yet the legislature and the governor continue to push their agenda on our children," stated England. "Parents are outraged that their young children -- including kindergarteners -- will be forced to participate in activities 'commemorating' the life of a man known for his sexuality. Parents and voters are deeply disappointed and outraged by the governor's signing of these two unnecessary, agenda-pushing bills."
This weekend, leading Christian pro-family advocacy organization Family Research Council (FRC) will feature former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney as one of its featured speakers at its "Value Voters Summit" www.valuesvotersummit.org. Despite Romney's unbiblical and far left-wing record as Massachusetts governor on the issues FRC claims to care the most about, FRC President Tony Perkins continues to refer to Romney as a "friend of the pro-family movement."
That's why we have authored the website www.tonyperkinstellthetruth.blogspot.com, because we believe someone claiming to stand for biblical teaching, as Mr. Perkins claims to, should have the integrity to tell the truth about the candidates he's providing a platform to reach Christian voters.
"In Mitt Romney's healthcare plan that he is applauding you can get an abortion for $50," said noted GOP strategist Mary Matalin on 1040-WHO Radio in Des Moines, Iowa, on December 12th, 2007.
We would like to ask Mr. Perkins if Ms. Matalin is lying, and if she isn't, do taxpayer-funded, $50 elective surgical abortions sound like a policy signed into law (2 years AFTER Romney's supposed "pro-life conversion") by a "friend of the pro-family movement?"
Please tell the truth, Mr. Perkins.
CNS.com reported on August 25th, 2008, that before the Massachusetts legislature had even had a chance to pass a law legalizing homosexual marriages (which they never did), Governor Romney unilaterally and unconstitutionally authorized the illegal alterations to and issuance of marriage licenses to homosexual couples, and even went so far as to demand that justices of the peace who wouldn't perform homosexual "marriages" for moral reasons, resign. www.cnsnews.com/news/article/34561
We would like to ask Mr. Perkins if CNS.com is lying, and if it isn't, does that sound like the actions of a, "friend of the pro-family movement?"
Please tell the truth, Mr. Perkins.
Attorney, scholar, and activist Phyllis Schlafly said Romney was claiming he had to "follow the law" when he unilaterally and illegally enacted homosexual "marriages," but that "there is no law (in Massachusetts) that requires or even allows" homosexual marriages. www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56674
We would like to ask Mr. Perkins if Ms. Schlafly is a liar, and if she isn't, does this sound like the actions of a "friend of the pro-family movement?"
Please tell the truth, Mr. Perkins.
In March of 2008, World Magazine reported the late Paul Weyrich admitted in a room of his peers at the Council for National Policy meeting in New Orleans, that he was wrong to have endorsed Romney for president. Weyrich is reported to have said, "Before all of you and almighty God I want to say I was wrong" and that it was "the worst mistake of (his) life."
We would like to ask Mr. Perkins if Mr. Weyrich, one of the Founding Fathers of the Christian Conservative movement and Reagan Revolution, was wrong, and if he wasn't then how can you continue to refer to the founding father of sodomy-based "marriages" and $50 tax-subsidized elective surgical abortions as a "friend of the pro-family movement?"
Please tell the truth, Mr. Perkins.
If you are attending the Values Voters Summit this weekend or would like more information, please visit www.tonyperkinstellthetruth.blogspot.com. Perhaps you can reach Mr. Perkins and ask him to tell the truth, since we have attempted to do so privately on several occasions over the last several years and all of our pleas to reach our brother in Christ have been ignored.
When no students left, the professor dismissed the class. Hacker adds that Lopez is an "A" student -- "but the problem is he never got a grade on that informative speech, and in fact, the professor wrote on his evaluation form, 'Ask God what your grade is.'"
Organizer Arthur Vautier told a Paris homosexual magazine, Tetu, that the demonstration is meant to “ challenge the Church to question religion on the issue of love and marriage between gays and between lesbians.”
Mrs. Howe says she is considering suing the police, after enduring what she described as a "frightening and intimidating" interrogation. She is seeking legal advice from the Christian Institute, a leading UK Christian lobby and advocacy group.
Touted as a measure to help more children find homes, Democratic California Rep. Pete Stark's "Every Child Deserves a Family Act" recommends that states allowing foster care placements only into married heterosexual households be deprived of federal child welfare funds. 
