TELLING IT LIKE IT IS !

“We shall seduce your sons…. We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups, in your movie theater bathrooms, in your army bunkhouses, in your truck stops, in your all male clubs, in your houses of Congress, wherever men are with men together. Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us.”

Those shocking words come from a manifesto published some years back by Michael Swift, a radical gay activist.

Swift’s manifesto goes on:

“All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked. Instead, legislation shall be passed which engenders love between men…. If you dare to cry faggot, faggot, queer, at us, we will stab you in your cowardly hearts and defile your dead, puny bodies…. There will be no compromises. We are not middle-class weaklings…. The family unit-spawning ground of lies, betrayals, mediocrity, hypocrisy and violence – will be abolished. The family unit, which only dampens imagination and curbs free will, must be eliminated…. All churches who condemn us will be closed. Our only gods are handsome young men.”

“Tremble, hetero swine, when we appear before you without our masks.”

Swift claimed the manifesto was nothing more than satire. An expression of his “inner rage”… an attempt to ridicule, through exaggeration, those who stood up in opposition to the radical-homosexual agenda.

But now, the United States Senate may vote within days (or even hours by the time you read this letter) on so-called “hate crimes” legislation that many are calling “The Pedophile Protection Act.”

Several weeks ago, Democrats were able to sneak HR 1913 (S. 909 in the Senate Version) through the Pelosi-controlled House of Representatives. And before it came to the floor, Congressman Louie Gohmert tried to amend the bill to exclude a variety of sex crimes, including pedophilia, and liberals in Congress went ballistic.

According to Gohmert: “When we tried to get the term sexual orientation narrowed down to where it didn’t include something like a pedophile… that was voted down on party lines… there are about 30 different types of sexual orientations, and they can include exhibitionism and voyeurism or things that are so offensive such as pedophilia or necrophilia. The problem is that the supporters of this bill did not want to exclude any of those and even voted down the amendment that would have excluded pedophilia.”

And now, we are hours away from passing a law that could actually make pedophiles and exhibitionists and voyeurs members of a protected class.

Gohmert gave an excellent real-world example, describing what could happen if a woman retaliated against a flasher: “The one who did the flashing committed a local misdemeanor. The one who hit with the purse singled him out because he’s an exhibitionist, and therefore she has now committed a federal hate crime and is looking at felony time.”

Say Hello To The Orwellian State.

John Whitehead, writing for Dakota Voice states: “On the whole, hate crime laws unnecessarily blur the distinction between what might be constitutionally protected, albeit deplorable, speech and criminal behavior. Eventually, this will spill over into criminalizing any kind of speech that any official in the echelons of government deems to be hateful or distasteful. Thus, hate crime laws … open the door for a whole new realm of prosecutions, namely thought crimes.”

Kevin Theriot with the Alliance Defense Fund says: “So-called ‘hate crime’ laws actually serve only one purpose: The criminalization of citizens based on whatever thoughts, beliefs, and emotions they have that are not considered to be ‘politically correct.’ No one should fall for the idea that this bill does anything to bring about greater justice for Americans.”

Mathew Staver with the Liberty Council reminds us: “In and of itself this law can be applied to speech. The nature of assault – putting someone in fear of their safety – what will that mean for someone preaching against homosexuality?”

Connie Hair with Human Events called the House passage of this bill, “yet another Democrat move toward the doubleplusungood Orwellian state” and even President George W. Bush fought this legislation on the grounds that it could be used to prosecute those whose views are out of line with those of the radical gay movement.

In 2000, a conservative clergyman sat in the Supreme Court gallery, listening as opposing sides argued a New Jersey case challenging the Boy Scouts of America’s exclusion of homosexuals. Thinking the clergyman who was sitting nearby was a fellow liberal, Bill Clinton’s liaison to the homosexual community leaned over and whispered: “We’re not going to win this case, but that’s OK. Once we get ‘hate crime’ laws on the books, we’re going to go after the [Boy] Scouts and all the other bigots.”

Now, 9 years later, the radical gay rights movement is very close to getting that wish. Make no mistake, this legislation may lay the foundation for the persecution of any and all people who simply oppose the radical gay agenda or believe that marriage is between one man and one woman … orthodox clergy, scientists concerned about infectious diseases and people of faith.

And what does that mean?

It means you better learn to keep your mouth shut. Because affirming your beliefs is about to become very, very dangerous.

The stated purpose of S. 909, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 is to “provide Federal assistance to States, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes to prosecute hate crimes, and for other purposes.”

And S. 909 prescribes penalties for any person who, “willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person.”

So what’s the big deal? Hate is a bad thing, isn’t it? Willfully causing bodily injury to another is already a crime, isn’t it?

What would cause a radical homosexual rights activist to gleefully proclaim; “Once we get ‘hate crime’ laws on the books, we’re going to go after the [Boy] Scouts and all the other bigots.”?

It sounds like much ado over nothing… or does it?

Ask Ake Green, a 63-year-old minister and pastor of a small church in the southern town of Borgholm, Sweden who simply stated in a sermon that homosexuality was “a deep cancerous tumor in the entire society” and denounced the government’s plan to promote domestic partnerships.

He was hauled into court, indicted, convicted, and sentenced to 30 days in jail. The prosecution asked for six months.

While reporting the on the Ake Green incident, CBN News made an interesting observation: “The hate speech law used to convict Green was first intended to protect Jews and other ethnic minorities from Nazi sympathizers. But in more recent times the law was amended to also protect ‘sexual orientation.'”

This will become the slippery-slope and why Bill Clinton’s liaison to the homosexual community so gleefully proclaimed: “Once we get ‘hate crime’ laws on the books, we’re going to go after the [Boy] Scouts and all the other bigots.”

Remember The Philadelphia 11?

Make no mistake, the leaders of the radical gay rights movement know that this so-called hate crimes bill is really a stepping-stone. If this sick bill becomes law, American society will see an unprecedented uprising of militant homosexuals, demanding that anyone who speaks against their agenda or lifestyle be hauled off to jail and charged with a “hate crime.”

It has already happened as Whitehead recounts the strange case of the Philadelphia 11: “Protesters exercising their free speech rights by carrying signs have been charged with felonies for the messages on their signs, which have been interpreted as ‘hate speech.’ In one instance, a group of Christians were prosecuted under a state hate crime law for ‘singing hymns’ and peacefully ‘carrying signs’ while attending a homosexual fair in Pennsylvania. Because the signs challenged the morality of homosexuality, these Christians were charged with three felonies and five misdemeanors and faced 47 years in prison for attempting to preach at a homosexual street fair. Incredibly, a state judge determined that the prosecutions could go forward. His rationale was that the Christians’ speech constituted so-called “fighting words.”

Bob Knight – one of the nation’s leading authorities on the radical gay rights movement – put it this way: “Homosexual activists have redefined any opposition to homosexuality as ‘hate speech.’ Laws already criminalize speech that incites violence. It’s easy to imagine a scenario in which any incident involving a homosexual can be blamed on people who have publicly opposed homosexual activism.”

Jennifer Riley, writing for the Christian Post, says: “Critics of the hate crimes legislation fear that if passed, the legislation would inhibit pastors from speaking about homosexuality as a biblical sin and be interpreted in a way that bars speech … Christian leaders have pointed to hate crime laws in England, Sweden and Canada, where Christians have been prosecuted for breaking these laws.”

But not to worry! Congressman Barney Frank says the bill “does not infringe on free speech in any way.” As if anyone can believe anything that Barney Frank would say!

Standing Falsely Accused …

According to the FBI only 1,460 out of 1.5 million violent crimes reported in the United States in 2007 were reportedly based on sexual orientation – that’s under one-tenth of 1%. And yet, there is a compelling reason to believe that the mere existence of hate crimes legislation actually generates bogus reports – In most cases, by individuals desperate to become victims or self-righteous ideologues hoping to promote “change.”

If you build it, the allegations will come.

A Family Research Council report cites just a few examples of phony attacks:

“In Houston, a homosexual mugging victim was left for dead in a traditionally ‘straight’ section of town. The press initially covered it as a hate crime, but investigators soon found that the man had been assaulted elsewhere and transported there, ‘to make it look like a hate crime.'”

“In Salt Lake City, a homosexual teacher at first thought bias offenders had put signs in her yard to intimidate her, but some of her own homosexual students later confessed to doing it.”

“In South Carolina, a lesbian was charged with giving false information to a police officer for saying that she was beaten; police contend she hired a man to beat her and then she reported it as a hate crime.”

Examples from John Leo, a columnist for U. S. News and World Report, has reported on bogus hate crimes for years:

“Jerry Kennedy, a gay resident assistant at the University of Georgia, reported he had been the target of nine hate crimes over a period of three years, including three acts of arson. But during questioning, Kennedy admitted that he had set the fires.”

“Two weeks after the murder of Matthew Shepard, a lesbian student at St. Cloud State University in Minnesota said two men shouted antigay slurs at her and then slashed her face. Outraged students raised nearly $12,000 as a reward for information about her attackers. Then the student confessed she had made up the story and cut her own face.”

“[A] lesbian student at Eastern New Mexico University said she had been attacked after her name was included with the names of seven professors on an antigay ‘hit list’ posted at a local Laundromat. Police arrested her after a surveillance camera at the Laundromat showed her posting the list.”

Is There Really An Epidemic?

In spite of the evidence, radical gay rights activists and their supporters in Congress still wildly and outrageously claim that there’s an epidemic of attacks that only federal law can address saying …

(A) The movement of members of targeted groups is impeded, and members of such groups are forced to move across State lines to escape the incidence or risk of such violence.

(B) Members of targeted groups are prevented from purchasing goods and services, obtaining or sustaining employment, or participating in other commercial activity.

(C) Perpetrators cross State lines to commit such violence.

THE PROBLEM IS THERE ARE NO SPECIFICS. NO STATISTICS. JUST VAGUE ALARMIST DESCRIPTIONS.

Does anyone really believe that vast hoards of people are moving to other states to avoid the hostility of hate-driven townsfolk with pitchforks? Or that these same townsfolk are crossing state lines in hot pursuit. Or that anyone is preventing people from shopping in the local grocery store?

All this rubbish is thrown into the bill for one reason only: to justify federal intervention.

Barack Hussein Obama said on his website he would extend federal “hate crimes” protection to sexual orientation, but no such epidemic exists… then why? It is to appease the homosexual organizations and voters who he owes for their votes!

We must act today, because time is short and Barack Hussein Obama will most certainly sign this Orwellian legislation.

When the Pelosi-led House of Representatives passed this legislation, your actions … your righteous cries of moral outrage stopped Majority Leader Harry Reid from fast-tracking this legislation through the Senate. You exposed this legislation to the light of day and liberals in Congress put it under wraps and waited for the heat to die down.

Now that the liberals in Congress believe the heat has died down. Remove from them the notion that they can sneak this bill – which Barack Hussein Obama will most certainly sign into law – through the Senate before you are any the wiser. You stopped them before. You can do it again.

Funding UNFPA (The United Nations Population Fund)

MISSION STATEMENT: UNFPA, the United Nations Population Fund, is an international development agency that promotes the right of every woman, man and child to enjoy a life of health and equal opportunity. UNFPA supports countries in using population data for policies and programmes to reduce poverty and to ensure that every pregnancy is wanted, every birth is safe, every young person is free of HIV/AIDS, and every girl and woman is treated with dignity and respect.

UNFPA – because everyone counts

Their whole website is a lie.  All the reproductive jargon and “help” is all about abortion.

Last year, a young Chinese woman – let’s call her Dan Li – ran afoul of the Chinese government.  She had become “illegally pregnant.”  By the time the authorities found out, Dan Li was seven months along.  Family planning officials tied her to a bed, induced labor, and, when the baby was born, killed the baby.

What happened to Dan Li is an abomination – one, however, that tragically takes place regularly in China.  But now, thanks to the U.S. Congress, you and I will be paying for it.

Last March, without fanfare, Congress passed a bill providing $50 million for the United Nations Population Fund.  This organization promotes abortion around the globe – including in China.  What makes the bill especially heinous is that it voided Kemp-Kasten, a bill which, for two decades, prevented our tax dollars from funding forced abortions and sterilization.

This blows the lid off the argument that abortion is all about giving a woman choice.  If Congress really stands for choice, as they claim, why did they vote for coercion?  If feminists are really for choice, why aren’t they fighting this law?  Why isn’t our President demanding that this brutalization of women be stopped?  This administration has the conscience of the Nazis … none!

Abortion is a glaring example of the difference worldview makes.  Are not all children – Chinese babies or inner-city African American babies – worthy of protection?  Are babies just mouths to feed, and a strain on the environment – or are they potential producers and contributors?  Do parents have the right under God to have as many children as they desire?  Or should governments dictate this decision?

Understand that coercive family planning is more than a humanitarian disaster … it is an abomination to life and to God!

Reggie Littlejohn is an expert on China’s “One Child” policy for a group called Human Rights Without Frontiers.  She points to the process and three negative outcomes of China’s policy.

First, “gendercide.”  Parents who are forced to limit their families to one child overwhelmingly abort girls.  For every 120 boys born in China, there are only 100 girls born.  So, since China’s “One Child” policy began in 1978, she writes, “400 million births” have been “prevented.”  That’s more than the current U.S. population.

Second, China’s gender imbalance “is a powerful, driving force behind trafficking in women and sexual slavery from nations surrounding China.”  Where do you think the young girls in America and other countries that are disappearing are going to? – China and the Middle East.

Third, according to the World Health Organization, China suffers the highest female suicide rate in the world – some 500 women per day.  As Littlejohn notes, “Forced abortion traumatizes women.  Could this high suicide rate be related to forced abortion?”  We know it is according to our American statistics.

You and I need to let our friends and churches know about the consequences of what Congress did – how their taxes being used by the UNFPA to support coercive family planning programs in China.  According to Reggie Littlejohn, if there’s enough of an outcry, “Congress can pass an amendment blocking . . . funding from going to nations that practice coercive family planning.”

I would hope even pro-choicers would agree that women deserve better than to be hunted down and tied up while their babies are being ripped out of them and killed.

As usual The New York Times passed on the opportunity to publish a great op-ed letter to President Barack Obama from Lou Pritchett, a former vice president of Procter & Gamble. Pritchett worked for that company for 36 years, until his retirement in 1989.

Confirmed by the Internet watchdog Snopes, here’s a sample of what Pritchett wrote:

Dear President Obama:

You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me. …

You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll. …

You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail.

You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the ‘blame America’ crowd and deliver this message abroad.

You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.

You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one.

You scare me because you prefer ‘wind mills’ to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves. …

You scare me because you have begun to use ‘extortion’ tactics against certain banks and corporations.

You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals. …

You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do.

You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O’Reillys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view.

You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.

Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.

Lou Pritchett

Thank you, Mr. Pritchett, for your love for America, honesty and willingness to risk your reputation by speaking up to this administration.

Here are some more . . .

President Obama:

You scare me because so many amazing corporate and American leaders, such as Lou Pritchett, are saying you scare them.

You scare me because after you initiate more government borrowing and bailouts than all presidents combined, you then require Congress to follow a system that is “pay-as-you-go.”

You scare me because you really do believe that going into massive amounts of debt can remedy our economy in the long run.

You scare me because your actions don’t reflect the federal governmental constraints and fiscally prudent principles of our Founding Fathers and Constitution.

You scare me because you buy and run the banking, automobile and (soon) health industries with taxpayers’ money but refuse to call it socialism.

You scare me because you claim to be a fighter for minorities and the promises of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness yet do not defend the unborn. What greater minority is there than those in the womb, against whom you already have enacted more pro-abortion laws than anyone since the Roe v. Wade decision?

You scare me because you promise to defend the U.S. against all potential enemies yet pacify those harboring terrorists, fight for the rights of combative detainees, and enable the enemies of Israel.

You scare me because your media team (including the mainstream media) seeks to label as radical or in some way penalize any opposing conservative voices … such as conservative talk show hosts, news agencies, columnists and actors.

You scare me because your media team does not address or diminish in any way your deification before the world, epitomized by the editor of Newsweek who stated on Chris Matthews’ MSNBC show: “In a way, Obama’s standing above the country, above the world. He’s sort of God.” (How much scarier can it get than representative statements like that in a republic that once stood for a balance among political powers and a government “by the people, for the people”?)

You scare me . . . period!

THIS INFORMATION DESERVES YOUR ATTENTION AND ACTION BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE  !

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), added the “Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act,” (which is better known to conservatives as the “Pedophile Protection Act,”) to his short-term legislative list Monday, by saying he was “committed” to a Senate vote on hate crimes legislation before the August recess.  The pro-homosexual newspaper Washington Blade reported the vote could happen as early as this week, but staffers at  Senator Kennedy’s office denied that claim, giving us a few more days to act.

The pro-homosexual, anti-faith bill, sponsored by Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and pushed hard by the Obama Administration, was until recently labeled S. 909 “Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act.” But it faced such strong resistance by conservatives (including threat of filibuster or faith-protecting amendments by pro-faith Senator Jim DeMint, R-SC), so instead Democrats have announced they will soon hide the bill as an amendment to another “must-move” bill, denying committee hearings, and completely side-stepping the Republicans right to debate and amend.

547 SEXUAL DEVIANCES TO BE PROTECTED BY FEDERAL MARSHALS

The forthcoming “poison pill” amendment will mirror a House bill H.R. 1913, already passed 249-175 along strict party lines, which makes “sexual orientation,” “gender,” and “gender identity” into federally-protected classes under the law, and codifies federal protection of up to 547 types of sexually deviant behaviors, including:

* Incest – sex with one’s offspring (a crime, of course)
* Necrophilia – sexual relations with a corpse, also a crime
* Pedophilia – sex with an underage child, another crime
* Zoophilia – a crime in numerous states
* Voyeurism – a criminal offense in most states
* Fronteurism – a man rubbing against an unknown woman’s buttocks
* Coprophilia – sexual arousal from feces
* Urophilia – sexual arousal from urine

Attempts by House Republicans to add amendments stating “pedophilia is not protected as a sexual orientation” were specifically blocked and defeated by House Democrats. Lesbian Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) expressed opposition to excluding pedophiles from the bill, and Democrats voted with her to strike any child-protection amendment. She claimed that pedophiles would not be defined within “sexual orientation,” but wouldn’t put that in writing, and refused to define that phrase “sexual orientation,” which according to the American Psychiatric Association includes all 547 sexual deviances listed in their DSM-III manual of clinical psychoses, including pedophilia, so now thanks to most Democrats, child molesters will be protected by federal law.

QUOTING THE BIBLE IN CHURCH WILL BE PUNISHED

Not only will sexually deviant behaviors gain legal protection, this legislation also lays the legal foundation to investigate, prosecute and persecute pastors, youth pastors, Bible teachers, and anyone else whose speech and thought is based upon and reflects the truths found in the Bible. How will this legislation over-rule the First Amendment?

PASTORS NOT PROTECTED BY FIRST AMENDMENT

S. 909 broadly defines “intimidation,” thus a pastor’s sermon could be viewed as “hate speech” if heard by an individual who then acts aggressively against persons based on any “sexual orientation.”

The pastor could be prosecuted for “conspiracy to commit a hate crime” or for “inciting violence against gays” simply by quoting the Bible in church. And the First Amendment won’t automatically protect pastors, since speech accused of “inciting violence” is not protected, and is punishable, under precedent of Supreme Court rulings.

In 1993 Wisconsin v. Mitchell, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a “hate speech” law providing enhanced punishments for violent crimes based on racial motives as revealed by speech of the accused, (which would now apply broadly to punish any “anti-gay motives” in the speech of accused pastor “co-conspirators.”)  But pastor, if a crazy person in your audience commits a crime against a heterosexual, don’t worry, you’ll get a comparative discount in your prison time.

IS PRAYER IN JESUS’ NAME A “HATE CRIME?”

Any public prayer against the sin of homosexuality could be construed as “inciting violence” by easily offended listeners, especially if those prayers are offered “in Jesus name.”  When I served our country as a former Navy Chaplain, for example, I was told in writing by Chief of Chaplains Rear-Admiral Louis Iasiello, that “any chaplain’s continued insistence on ending public prayers ‘in Jesus’ name’…could reasonably tend to denigrate those with different forms of faith.” His policy prohibiting prayers “in Jesus name” was enforced against me at court-martial, before it was later rescinded by Congress in 2006. But this year I’ve already been falsely accused of “inciting violence” because I quoted verbatim from Psalm 109 in my public prayers, (for which secular activist Mikey Weinstein literally requested an FBI investigation against me!) Just imagine more anti-Christian aggression by law enforcement officials AFTER this hate-crimes bill becomes law.

IS PREACHING AGAINST SIN A HATE CRIME?

As a former Navy Chaplain who was punished (in writing, three times) for quoting the Bible in chapel during optionally-attended worship, I know exactly how they’ll come after us. The enemies of religious liberty will simply declare certain gospel phrases “hateful” and “offensive” like my commanding officer who punished me for quoting John 3:36 in chapel, and was supported by government lawyers for “protecting” easily offended listeners from the “offensive” gospel of salvation through Jesus Christ.

Congressman Louie Gohmert (R-TX) agrees with me, saying pastors, rabbis, or imams could be charged with encouraging or inducing a “hate crime” if they preach against homosexuality.  “Every preacher of the gospel, unless you cut out parts of it; every imam who mentions anything with regard to sexual immorality – they could be pursued, and in other countries they have been,” says Gohmert.  (Congressmen Gohmert is my personal advocate, with whom I preached last year at a pro-faith rally in Texas…and we both agree the gospel of freedom from sin really is “love speech” not “hate speech.”)

FREE SPEECH SUPPRESSED IN NORWAY: Hate crimes laws protecting homosexuals from criticism are already silencing pastors in Norway, where these dangerous laws specifically empower law enforcement officials to prosecute “intimidation” of homosexuals. For example, Congressman Gohmert warned “I was talking to a guy from Norway who was telling me that people are even afraid to say Mary was a virgin, because just bringing up sexuality at all can raise problems with law enforcement.”

FREE SPEECH CRIMINALIZED IN SWEDEN: In Sweden, Pastor Ake Green received a one-month jail sentence last year under a Swedish “hate crimes” law that forbids criticism of those who participate in homosexual behavior. The Goeta Appeals Court later overturned the decision.  The government demanded the pastor be punished by appealing the case to the Swedish Supreme Court, which ruled the law unconstitutional.  Yet here in America, the Reid-Kennedy-Obama trio is pushing to pass and enforce this same type of “anti-free speech” law, despite their acknowledgment that any such enforcement would be unconstitutional in America too. (They why pass the bill in the first place?)

FREE SPEECH CRIMINALIZED IN CANADA: In Canada, where “hate crimes” laws already passed, the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal actively forbid evangelical pastor Stephen Boisson from expressing his moral opposition to homosexuality. The tribunal also ordered Boisson to pay $5,000 “damages for pain and suffering” and apologize to the “human rights” activist who filed the complaint. His crime? In 2002, the pastor wrote a letter to the editor of his local newspaper in which he denounced the homosexual agenda as “wicked” and stated that: “Children as young as five and six years of age are being subjected to psychologically and physiologically damaging pro-homosexual literature and guidance in the public school system; all under the fraudulent guise of equal rights.”  The Canadian government tribunal ordered the Christian pastor to “cease publishing in newspapers, by email, on the radio, in public speeches, or on the internet, in future, disparaging remarks about gays and homosexuals.” (This “re-education commission” reminds me of Big Brother from Orwell’s 1984.)

FREE SPEECH CRIMINALIZED IN PENNSYLVANIA: Can’t happen in America?  It already has.  In 2004 my friend Michael Marcavage was arrested along with ten other Christians (including two elderly grandmothers), and charged with violating Pennsylvania’s “hate crimes” laws, because they carried signs conveying God’s love at a Gay Pride rally. One member of “The Philadelphia Eleven,” Arlene Elshinnawy, 75 year-old grandmother of three, was holding a sign: “Truth is hate to those who hate the truth,” before she was hauled off to jail by police officers. They were literally threatened with 50 years in jail for preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ on a public sidewalk, because it offended gays. That hate crimes law was so outrageous it was later found unconstitutional by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, but now Ted Kennedy and Barack Obama want to pass essentially that same discredited law nationwide.

WE CAN STILL DE-RAIL THIS TRAIN

But together, we can still stop them. We’ve identified 16 Democrats below, who are NOT YET committed as co-sponsors of S. 909, so please call them today, asking to OPPOSE AND FILIBUSTER any amendment to any bill that resembles S. 909. Sadly two Republicans (Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, R-ME) have joined 43 Democrats by co-sponsoring this pro-homosexual bill, so call them too, and ask them to switch.

But remember, 100 emails = 10 phone calls = 1 fax in political capital, since the Senate staffers must handle each paper and usually write a reply. So you can join our automated fax-petition campaign first, and WE WILL FAX THE 18 KEY UNDECIDED SENATORS LIST ABOVE with your personalized petition.  This does cost a bit but it will save you time or you can make the contacts yourself.

Thank you for reading our lengthy analysis. If you’ve read this far, we must agree, so now please forward this email widely to other pro-faith friends, and to pastors in all 50 states.

Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt

(For media interviews, or to invite “Chaps” to speak to your crowd, click here.)

P.S. Time is urgent! The full Senate could vote any day to pass S. 909 as an amendment to any other “must-move” bill.  Select and sign today, & we will forward your name immediately. Please don’t wait another minute. Life, Liberty, and Jesus are too important to be banned by Harry Reid, Ted Kennedy, and Barack Obama.

Disclaimer: The views of Chaplain Klingenschmitt, who was honorably but involuntarily discharged from the Navy in 2007 after facing court-martial for praying “in Jesus name” in uniform, (but was later vindicated by Congress), are his own personal views, not the views of any political party, government, or organization.

Quotes from President Barack Hussein Obama at the Cairo University on Thursday, June 04, 2009.

“Throughout history Islam has demonstrated tolerance and racial equality.”

“My father came from a Muslim family; I know civilization’s debt to Islam.”

“America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition.”

“America is not and will not be at war with Islam.”

“9/11 had led some in my country to view Muslims with fear and as being anti-human rights.”

“Changes brought about by globalism made many Muslims view the West as hostile.”

None of these are accurate … in fact they are consider lies by most Americans and not representative at all to them.

Please tell me about Islam’s demonstration of tolerance and racial equality … you can’t … history shows there is none.

What debt does civilization owe to Islam … convert or death to the infidel? … civilization owes Islam nothing.

America is exclusive and what on earth and why would they want to compete with Islam?

9-11 had nothing to do with Muslim human rights but everything to do with a terrorist war against the West on American soil … indeed taking away American human rights. Islam’s human rights records are atrocious.

Globalism is not what made Muslims view the West as hostile … the Koran and Islamic teachings did!

How anyone can actually make these statements in an Islamic country is ridiculous!

Could the rise in government spending – from economic stimulus to health care reform to education spending – endanger the vitality of religion in America? That’s a question University of Virginia Professor W. Bradford Wilcox discussed recently in the Wall Street Journal.

Wilcox zeroed in on a intriguing study entitled “State Welfare Spending and Religiosity.” The study’s authors, Anthony Gill and Erik Lundsgaarde, found an “inverse relationship between religious observance and welfare spending.” Put more simply, the more a government spends on welfare, the fewer people go to church. This is why it is that church attendance is so low in welfare states such as Denmark and Sweden compared to countries like the U.S. and the Philippines – where government doesn’t provide cradle-to-grave assistance.

Anthony Gill hits the nail on the head. “For many centuries,” he writes, “average citizens and local communities have often relied upon the support of religious organizations to meet their various social needs, including assistance for the poor, counseling in times of crisis, and education for the young.” So as the government grows, it elbows out the church and other voluntary associations. Gill continues, “Many people have found that they can get the same services from the government without having to give a time commitment to the local church.”

Now, we would like to think that most people don’t stay in church just because they get can get help in times of trouble. But the truth is that many people first encounter the Church when they are in need: at a crisis pregnancy center, a soup kitchen, or in counseling for drug abuse or alcoholism. So as Wilcox writes in the Wall Street Journal, “Many of those who initially turn to religious organizations for mutual aid end up developing a faith that is as supernatural as it is material.”

Yes there are other factors behind declining church attendance in America but the recent turning of the people toward government as the answer to all our problems is also detrimental to themselves and the Church. It is also destructive to the future of American democracy.

In his book, Democracy in America, Frenchman Alexis de Tocqueville marveled at how Americans could accomplish almost anything through voluntary associations – especially churches. They built schools, hospitals, sent missionaries all over the world. He wrote, “I frequently admired the boundless skill of Americans in setting large numbers of people a common goal and inducing them to strive toward that goal voluntarily.”

De Tocqueville doubted that government could ever accomplish all that American citizens could do through their associations. But he also warned that if government should supplant the good work of these associations, the American people would ultimately end up dependent upon government. And this, he said, would imperil not only American democracy, but “civilization itself.”

In times of trouble, it’s natural to echo the question of the Psalmist from Psalm 121: “Where does my help come from?” Sadly, it seems that more and more Americans these days would answer, “It comes from Uncle Sam.”

The attempt to prove that homosexuality is determined biologically has been dealt a knockout punch. An American Psychological Association publication includes an admission that there’s no homosexual “gene” – meaning homosexuals aren’t born that way.

For decades, the APA has not considered homosexuality a psychological disorder, while other professionals in the field consider it to be a “gender-identity” problem. But the new statement, which appears in a brochure called “Answers to Your Questions for a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality,” states the following:

“There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors.”

That contrasts with the APA’s statement in 1998: “There is considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person’s sexuality.”

Peter LaBarbera, who heads Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, believes the more recent statement is an important admission because it undermines an unproven popular theory. “People need to understand that the ‘gay gene’ theory has been one of the biggest propaganda boons of the homosexual movement over the last 10 – 15 years,” he points out. “Studies show that if people think that people are born homosexual they’re much less likely to resist the gay agenda.”

Matt Barber with the Liberty Counsel feels the pronouncement may have something to do with saving face. “Well, I think here the American Psychological Association is finally trying to restore some credibility that they’ve lost over the years by having become a clearly political organization as opposed to an objective, scientific organization,” he states.

With the new information from the APA I wonder if the organization will admit that homosexuals who want to change can change. Homosexuality is defined by behavior and untold thousands of people have found freedom from that lifestyle through reparative therapy or … most effectively … a relationship with Jesus Christ.

LaBarbera in agreement says, “Change through Christ is possible – and it’s one of the most heartwarming aspects of the whole gay debate. Many men and women have come out of homosexuality, mostly through a relationship with Jesus Christ. The fact that these professional organizations will not study that, will not acknowledge that, shows how ‘in the tank’ they are for the homosexual movement.”

Just because elites will not recognize the change does not mean the change does not exist … God changes people through Jesus Christ regardless of the sin.

Big Labor’s Investment In Obama Pays Off !

Andy Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union, boasted to the Las Vegas Sun this week “We spent a fortune to elect Barack Obama – $60.7 million to be exact – and we’re proud of it.” This labor organization’s leadership is getting its money’s worth too. Whether rank-and-file workers and ordinary taxpayers are profiting from this ultimate campaign pay-for-play scheme is another matter entirely.

The two-million-member union, which represents both government and private service employees, proudly claimed that its workers “knocked on 1.87 million doors, made 4.4 million phone calls … and sent more than 2.5 million pieces of mail in support of Obama.” It dispatched SEIU leaders to 7 states in the final weekend before the election to get out the vote for Obama and other Democrats.

Through a series of local chapter takeovers and bully campaigns to destroy the reputation of executives who refuse to submit to their will, Stern and his scandal-plagued lieutenants have consolidated low-skill service workers to create a 21st century labor empire. The ubiquitous Stern now enjoys a prominent seat at the table of every major policy discussion at the White House, including economic recovery and healthcare radicalization.

Obama champions the SEIU’s top legislative priorities: expansive government healthcare (paid for with regressive sin taxes) and the “Employee Free Choice Act” to do away with private-ballot union elections in the workplace. He has SEIU-blessed bureaucrats installed in every corner of his administration to carry out the agenda.

The SEIU scored not one but two Cabinet appointees: Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and Labor Secretary Hilda Solis. The SEIU pitched in with maximum donations to Solis’ first congressional campaign and lent her nearly 300 canvassers and ground troops. “I wouldn’t be here, were it not for my friends in the labor movement,” she gushed. Indeed, over four terms in Congress, Solis has pocketed more than $900,000 in union campaign contributions.

Former SEIU chief lobbyist Patrick Gaspard served as the Obama campaign’s national political director and transition deputy director of personnel. During the 2004 election cycle, he led the George Soros-funded group America Coming Together (ACT) as national field director. SEIU poured $23 million of workers’ dues money into ACT in its failed attempt to put Democratic Sen. John Kerry in the White House. Under Gaspard’s tenure at ACT, the get-out-the-vote group employed convicted felons as canvassers and committed campaign finance violations that led to a $775,000 fine by the Federal Election Commission. Gaspard was appointed White House political director shortly after Election Day 2008.

SEIU Secretary-Treasurer Anna Burger was appointed to the president’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board to provide advice on “boosting the sagging U.S. economy” (translation: imposing new employment regulations on companies and expanding union membership rolls).

Within two weeks of moving into the White House, Obama signed a series of executive orders championed by union bosses. The new rules authorized sweeping powers for the labor secretary that essentially blackball non-union contractors targeted by labor organizers and blacklist non-union employees in the private sector from working on taxpayer-funded projects. Such regulatory favoritism limits freedom in the workplace and raises the cost of doing business.

Another measure immediately adopted by Obama requires that when a government service contract runs out and there’s a new contract to perform the same services at the same location, the new contractor must retain the old workers. Mickey Kaus of the left-leaning Slate magazine dubbed the move the “Labor Payoff of the Day.”

The payoffs keep coming. Last week Obama slashed the Labor Department’s funding to investigate union corruption – a welcome move for Stern, who has seen three of his handpicked deputies resign in 2008-2009 over financial scandals involving cronyism, nepotism, and embezzlement.

California officials also reported last week that the Obama White House gave the SEIU an unprecedented role in negotiations over federal stimulus funds. According to the Los Angeles Times, the union lobbied the feds to withhold nearly $7 billion in stimulus money from California unless it revoked a wage cut for unionized healthcare workers – which had already been approved by Democratic lawmakers as part of a budget deal forged in February. Top SEIU officials participated in a conference call last month on the issue; the Obama White House backs the union demands.

SEIU’s enforcers have set aside $10 million to un-elect any of its political beneficiaries who abandon their pledges to do the union’s legislative bidding. The campaign money was raised by slapping an extra $6-per-member fee on top of regular dues payments – and funneled straight to the union’s political action committee. Meanwhile, after spending a fortune to put Obama in office, the union laid off a third of its DC field staff (in violation of its own employment protections, according to the workers) due to … budget troubles.

These laid-off workers are collateral damage in Big Labor’s pursuit of power. The only jobs guaranteed by SEIU’s merger with Hope and Change, Inc. belong to their management.

Usually May is the time of the year when students are fitted for the cap and gown, count their credits, and pay their school bill. With a firm handshake and a costly piece of paper, they will start their lives in the real world. Too bad that won’t be true for Julea Ward, who used to be a graduate student at Eastern Michigan University until she was kicked out for her religious beliefs.

Ms. Ward was enrolled in a graduate program at the school and as part of her education was required to enroll in a counseling practicum. In that practicum, she was assigned a case involving a homosexual who needed help. Ms. Ward did not feel that she could affirm the student’s homosexual lifestyle because of her Christian beliefs, so she asked her supervisor what she should do. His advice was to refer the student to a counselor who had no qualms with affirming homosexual behavior. That is what she did, and it was all done before she saw the student. There was no counseling that took place between the two, there was no confrontation between the two, and there was no condemnation of homosexuality – just an honest confession of her deeply held religious belief. The story doesn’t end there though.

Julea was summoned to appear before a disciplinary hearing and told that if she wanted to continue on with her graduate program, she would have to submit to a “remediation” program so that she could see “the error of her ways.” She refused to be forced into a re-education program designed to convert her from biblical faith, and as a result, she was kicked out of school. This is the “tolerance” at America’s education facilities … no tolerance for anyone who does not agree with someone else’s thought!

Now, remember, Julea didn’t demand that the student be denied help, she didn’t get in his face and tell him he’s condemned to hell, she didn’t even roll her eyes and give a general impression of disgust. She simply told the truth, obeyed what her supervisor told her to do, and carried on with her life.

Does it scare you that the people overseeing her program weren’t content with the fact that she acted properly and with integrity? Does is scare you that they wanted her to change not just her actions, but her religious beliefs? Would they say that to any other belief except Christianity? No!

Parents, if you have a child in a publicly funded college or university, this should make all kinds of alarms go off in your head. Any parent who takes their faith seriously should be very concerned.

Publicly funded colleges and universities, and even private schools, used to pride themselves on being open forums, encouraging diversity of beliefs and philosophies. They still think that is what they are, but the truth is very clear: they are only open to ideas that are not from an evangelical Christian worldview … and make sure you don’t practice what you believe.

Now the government is getting into the act of criminalizing your Christian conscience. Two pieces of legislation heading for Congress are sure to be used to turn what used to be religious principles into a crime. The administration is moving to repeal the “conscience clause” that protects healthcare workers from performing procedures that violate their beliefs, and protects faith-based healthcare facilities (think Catholic hospitals) from being sued for not performing abortions and the like. If the conscience clause is overturned, following your faith-informed conscience will no longer be constitutionally protected, and may well become a criminal act.

The second piece of legislation that attacks Christian faith is the so-called “hate speech” rule (H.R. 1913 / S. 909). Under this proposed law, cloaked in the guise of “protection,” it is possible to see courts prosecuting any people of faith from speaking out against homosexuality, abortion, fetal stem-cell experimentation, and a host of other issues not deemed politically correct. Every issue will be open to “whoever’s interpretation” and once again this administration’s social engineers will be at work.

Maybe we need to change our national motto from “In God We Trust” to “Trust in God at Your Own Peril.”

Sweden Approves Gender-Based Abortions

Sweden has made it legal for a mother to let her unborn child be aborted if she is not happy with its gender:

Swedish women will be permitted to abort their children based on the sex of the fetus, according to a ruling by Sweden’s National Board of Health and Welfare.

The ruling was spurred by a request from Kai Wedenberg, head of the clinic where a woman twice requested, and received, an abortion based on sex. Mr. Wedenberg asked for clarification from health officials after a woman, who already had two girls, requested amniocentesis and to be told the sex of her unborn child. She found out she was pregnant with another girl and asked for an abortion six days later.

The woman then became pregnant again, returned to the clinic and asked for another amniocentesis, which was not performed. Later, at her ultrasound, she asked the nurse to reveal the sex of her fetus, which was a girl. After learning this, the mother requested an abortion later that day and received it later that week.

It is an incredible bad sign of the times: people do no longer respect human life. Having a child was once considered a blessing, no matter its gender. Today, not anymore in the many countries in which people have forgotten that human beings are the most exceptional and wonderful of all God’s creations … America is on that road under this administration.