Posts

I Was WRONG About Same-Sex Marriage [+videos]

SorryBy John Zmirak. President Obama, and each of the Clintons, has made a public statement parallel to my own on this volatile topic, so I stand in illustrious company as I say it: I wish to reverse my previous public statements on same-sex marriage. The progress of law, the statements and actions of gay advocates, and the movement of public opinion have rendered my old views repugnant to me, and I now I offer a full and public retraction. Thanks to the hard work of Apple, Walmart, and the national media, I have changed my mind on same sex marriage.

I now oppose it.


Less than two years ago, I wrote that conservatives and Christians probably ought to chalk up the legal battle for natural marriage as lost, and offer a “grand compromise.” Instead of relying on valid, truthful, but unpopular arguments from nature, tradition and the well-being of children to stop the progress of same-sex marriage, I thought that we should switch to arguments from freedom of association. We should agree to allow same-sex couples in each of the 50 states the benefits of the tenuous, temporary sex contract that “marriage” had become in the wake of no-fault divorce — but only if we received two important concessions in return:

1. Laws permitting “covenant marriages” in each of those states, granting couples who wished it access to the protections that covered marriage and the family circa 1940 — when divorce was hard to obtain in most American states, and only for provable cause such as physical abuse, abandonment or adultery. The same arguments from individual liberty that would permit same-sex couples to obtain flimsy, secular marriages must allow couples to contract more durable bonds, if they chose to. The state that would enforce the gay contract (a) should be willing to likewise enforce “covenant” contract (b).

2. Repeal of laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation — which otherwise would impose a crushing burden on religious believers in particular, violating their freedom of association.

I thought that such a compromise might end the legal battle, and even strengthen marriage, provided that:

3. Christian churches rallied to defend marriage within their own denominations. As a Catholic, I thought that my church could light the way by tightening up its own treatment of marriage — demanding extensive religious instruction for couples who wanted to marry in church; insisting that wherever “covenant marriages” were available they must contract them; and making annulments (Catholic declarations that a marriage had never existed) much, much harder to get.

Well, wasn’t I a prophet?

As things turned out, the Supreme Court instead of the voters will dictate same-sex marriage, as it dictates everything else of importance in our democracy. The only question remaining is how many Republican appointees will vote like Democrats. So Christians and conservatives have no horse to trade.

Nor do many libertarians — with honorable exceptions such as John Stossel — really seem to give a hoot about freedom of association. At least when it comes to Christians trying to run religious schools or make a living in peace, rather than pot dealers grooving with their clients.

Nor does my own church seem likely to tighten up the sacrament of marriage — not when powerful cardinals such as the head of the German bishops’ conference are threatening schism if they don’t get approval for de facto Catholic divorce.

So I was wrong about everything. Let’s pause to analyze why. I think the central reason is that Americans are not nearly as concerned about real liberty as they pretend to be. People are not switching their opinions on same sex marriage because they have suddenly realized that freedom of contract is implied by a view of human freedom that they consider sacred.

Far from it. Instead, they have been convinced by a two-decades-long barrage of TV programs and Facebook status updates that gay couples aren’t “gross” and “weird,” but “charming,” and “sometimes really funny.” Meanwhile, Christians and others who object to such sexual practices are no longer normal and sensible, but “bigoted” and “mean.” So Americans want the government to promote, using its full coercive power, the presumed interests of the charming funny people at the expense of the scowling killjoys.

Once the moral status of homosexual behavior has been surrendered, it’s easy, if you don’t think too hard, to smoosh together the moral objections to that behavior with the old-time visceral loathing that racists felt toward “race-mixing.” And how concerned should we be with the rights of bigots, anyway? They should be reluctantly, barely tolerated, so long as they don’t frighten the horses. And the state really should protect their kids from imbibing their hateful views.

To abandon the argument on the moral merits of homosexual relationships, as I foolishly advocated, is to freely accept the position of disenfranchised crank in today’s America. And given Americans’ very tenuous grasp on the meaning of freedom, such a position isn’t safe.

So I think we should support “religious freedom” bills as a last-ditch firewall against gay totalitarianism, though this issue is not just about religion; but it’s much more important for those who value marriage to rally their forces and try again to convince the public of the meaning of natural marriage. Our opponents started selling their argument three decades ago, and they’ve largely succeeded. That’s proof that effecting a fundamental change of mind on core issues is possible. So is the growing acceptance of pro-life views among college students. It’s past time that we launched a counter-offensive of real truth and real love. We have the advantage of nature and reason on our side, and every day, we have fresh evidence of what same-sex “marriage” does to children and to a free society.

We will probably need to launch a campaign for a constitutional amendment to ratify the truth about marriage, at least as a focal point. That might seem quixotic, but remember how quickly things change: Ten years ago, Democratic candidates didn’t feel safe advocating same-sex marriage. Now Indiana pizza makers cannot feel safe opposing it. To assume that this change is irreversible “progress” is simply to surrender, and hope for toleration inside a poorly-defended ghetto.

To put it briefly and starkly: In the fight against gay totalitarianism, we need to get back to critiquing the “gay” part. It’s an easier sell. Too many Americans have a soft spot for totalitarianism. (See “I Was Wrong About Same-Sex Marriage”, originally posted HERE)

____________________________________________________________

#HitlerReacts To Denied #GayWeddingCake

By Louder With Crowder. Listen, here at LouderWithCrowder.com we hate comparisons to Nazis as much as the next guy. Especially Hitler. But this recent deal with bakeries, pizzerias and religious freedom has created a line in the sand. When people want the government to be able to tell its citizens exactly HOW they should do business… or be allowed to put them out of business… that’s the definition of fascism. It’s that simple? Where do you line up?

(Read more from this story HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

HIDDEN CAMERA: Gay Wedding Cake At Muslim Bakeries [+video]

GayActually, I taped this video a long time ago but due to audio corruption issues, was never able to upload it. Now that my in-house whizz kid, Jared was able to salvage the footage, I am passing it onto you.

What do you think happens when a gay, like SUPER gay Crowder tries to get a super gay wedding cake baked at a Muslim bakery? I’m pretty sure you can guess, but you might as well watch this week’s adventure to Dearborn, MI to find out!

(Read more from “HIDDEN CAMERA: Gay Wedding Cake At Muslim Bakeries” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Gay Group Demands Christian Churches Be SHUT DOWN for Opposing Same-Sex Marriage

freedomIt has begun. LGBT “activists” have gone full fascist since the passage of Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).

Now — right before the holiest days in the Christian calendar — one gay group is attacking Churches who dare to believe that homosexuality is wrong.

The largest gay group in one Western state is demanding that Churches who follow the Bible be shut down by the government.

[Listen to Dr. Ryan Anderson of the Heritage Foundation discuss the left’s assault on religious freedom in America]

Jeran Artery, the chairman of Wyoming Equality posted that stunning statement to his Facebook page. When Christians reacted with outrage, the cowardly Artery deleted it. No apology, just hoping it would go down the memory hole. No such luck . . .

This should come as no surprise, as it reflects the vile militancy the LGBT movement is known for. Just as they unleashed threats of violence and arson against a tiny pizzeria in Indiana when they dared to express a very mild opinion against gay marriage, so they want to punish Christians who dare to preach, well, Christianity. (Read more from “Gay Group Demands Christian Churches Be SHUT DOWN for Opposing Same-Sex Marriage” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Gay Totalitarianism and the Coming Persecution of Christians [+video]

jacbootIf you have been following mass media over the past few days, you will have learned from an economist at the U.S. Department of Labor that defenders of religious freedom are “Nazis.” Take a moment to ponder that assertion. Roll it around in your head for a while. You’ll be hearing a lot more fighting words as we enter the next phase of Christian life in America.

Sample the hate that has been spewed at the state of Indiana in the past week, and faithful Christians in recent years, by gay activists and their allies. We are “bigots,” “Neanderthals” and “haters,” whose views must be ritually rejected by anyone hoping to keep a job in today’s America — even in a Catholic high school. Where will this end? Is there a logical stopping point for this aggression, where Christians are left in peace?

History teaches that mass vilification rarely stops short of spilling blood. The French Jacobins who spent the 1780s slandering the clergy in pornographic pamphlets went on in the 1790s to slaughter Christians by the hundreds of thousands. The Turks paved the way for killing a million Armenian Christians with a wave of propaganda. The Bolsheviks followed their “anti-God” crusade of the 1920s with starvation camps and firing squads. The Communist governments of Eastern Europe obeyed the same script, as scholar Anne Applebaum documents in her sobering study The Iron Curtain. The Hutu government of Rwanda prepared for its assault on the once-powerful Tutsis by incessantly describing them as “cockroaches” on radio broadcasts, which triggered a genocide.

If the media, the law and our elite institutions succeed in lumping Christian sexual morals in with white racism, how long will it be before believing Catholics, Protestants, Orthodox (and many religious minorities) find themselves labelled as members of “extremist sects,” no more to be trusted with the care of their own children than the Branch Davidians were?

Does that sound crazy to you? Then ask yourself why the German government, and the European Court of Human Rights, felt justified in seizing a Christian home-schooled student — with the apparent approval of the Obama administration. Think about the moral views you teach your own kids. Would your local education bureaucrats approve?

Perhaps Chicago’s cardinal, Francis George, wasn’t guilty of hyperbole when he said, “I expect to die in bed, my successor will die in prison and his successor will die a martyr in the public square.”

Joining him would be many Christians who affirm the Gospel in its integrity — instead of the neutered version that’s now sweeping the denominations to swell the ranks of the persecutors. See the Episcopalians and Presbyterians who are now blessing same-sex marriages; see “Catholic” universities such as Marquette, which fired a professor for defending the Catholic Catechism on this subject, and bishops such as Paul Bootkowski of Metuchen, N.J., who backed up a Catholic school that suspended a Catholic teacher for her Facebook comments critical of gay activism. With shepherds like these, who really needs wolves?

It’s stunning how quickly the demands of gay activists went from libertarian (“Don’t arrest us for sodomy”) to totalitarian (“Take part in our weddings or we’ll destroy your livelihoods.”)

But I am not surprised. I was in New York City when the radical gay activists of ACT UP targeted John Cardinal O’Connor for upholding biblical teaching on sexuality — even as he spent millions offering free care for indigent victims of AIDS. The “Stop the Church” demonstrations featured images of O’Connor in Nazi uniform, and culminated on Dec. 10, 1989, in an orchestrated attack on St. Patrick’s Cathedral during a Mass, where gay militants shouted down the celebrant, and demanded Holy Communion — only to throw it down and stomp on the body of Christ.

This bigoted attack on a religious service did not discredit ACT UP; indeed, you can now read an article celebrating it courtesy of the U.S. government-sponsored Radio Free Europe. Here’s a triumphalist video of the event, which includes appalling footage inside the cathedral:

If Indiana caves and guts its religious freedom law — as Gov. Mike Pence has already promised — it will prove an equal triumph for those who are so enraged at Christian teaching that they are willing to persecute Christians.

If these zealots succeed, they will tear up the civil peace in this country, forcing millions of Americans to choose between church and state. If laws or government policies beggar Christian businesses, close Christian colleges and schools and force faithful Christians into third-class citizenship — making us virtual dhimmis, like the Christian Copts in Egypt — what should we do? What should be our response now that we know what they want to do, and are overplaying their hand, but before they complete their coup d’etat?

We need to ask ourselves some brutal questions: How should the faithful in the U.S. military respond? What about those in the state and local police? City, state and federal employees? What about religious shareholders in corporations led by anti-Christians, such as Apple?

Should we engage in large-scale, non-violent civil disobedience, as black Americans once did in the face of Jim Crow laws? We have the numbers to bring this country to a sudden screeching halt, if we can stand up to the media’s blows and spitting. Those who resist these unjust laws will be treated with all the violence and contempt that was poured out on the pro-life Operation Rescue in the 1980s and ’90s. Local cops from West Hartford, Connecticut, to Los Angeles, California, brutalized teenagers, old women, even nuns and pregnant mothers.

But we need not act alone, like these isolated bakers and florists. The marriage deconstructionists can only succeed by dividing us, vilifying us and picking us off one at a time. This is the essence of their strategy — they’re now trying it with an entire state. Tim Cook (or Apple’s shareholders) would backpedal in an instant if he learned the hard way that he was insulting and infuriating 2/3rds of American states, and half the population.

The frog must jump out of the pan, before it boils.

We should not let the possibility or even the likelihood of “failure” make us timid. Witness is utterly different from propaganda, more fragile but far more enduring.

For centuries, the early Christians endured far worse than we might face, dying in the Colosseum to the taunts of jeering crowds — whose grandchildren would flee the moral chaos of collapsing Rome and flock to the underground churches. All the persecution that a government like China can deal its native Christians has not stopped the church from exploding there, and striking fear at the highest levels of a totalitarian government. The battered church in Poland led the movement that brought down the Iron Curtain, through sober, persistent resistance.

Perhaps the future we face is the one that Cardinal George envisioned. Speaking of a future bishop who would someday die a martyr, George predicted, “His successor will pick up the shards of a ruined society and slowly help rebuild civilization, as the church has done so often in human history.” If we stand for eternity, then history is on our side. (See “Gay Totalitarianism and the Coming Persecution of Christians [+video]”, originally posted HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Arizona Judges Told They Must Perform Same-Sex Marriages If They Do Any Weddings, Regardless of Deeply Held Religious Beliefs

Photo Credit: Charisma News

Photo Credit: Charisma News

By Deborah Hamilton. A recent ruling in Arizona may have set a frightening precedent, as judges there were ordered to perform same-sex weddings if they do any weddings at all—regardless of whether doing so violates their faith.

According to a report last week by the Associated Press, a recently issued opinion by a state judiciary ethics advisory committee in Arizona says “turning away same-sex couples would violate a state judicial-conduct rule against bias or prejudice based on sexual orientation.”

Therefore, judges must perform same-sex weddings, even if their morals and beliefs contradict the practice. The opinion also said that “a judge’s religious or other personal beliefs don’t make a difference nor does it matter if the judge performs weddings at non-court locations.”(Read more from “Arizona Judges Told They Must Perform Same-Sex Marriages If They Do Any Weddings” HERE)


____________________________________________________________

Myths About Redefining Marriage

By Peter Sprigg. Advocates of redefining “marriage” to include same-sex couples use a number of arguments that can best be described as “myths.” The reality is often quite different. For example:

MYTH: A “one man and one woman” definition imposes a religious definition of marriage on civil society.

REALITY: The definition of marriage is rooted in nature itself. The sexual union of a man and a woman is what reproduces the human race. The durable commitment of that man and woman to one another is what provides children with a mother and father. This is important for people of any religion or of no religion.

MYTH: Children don’t actually need both a mother and a father.

REALITY: An overwhelming body of social science evidence demonstrates that children raised by their own mother and father, who are committed to one another in a lifelong marriage, are happier, healthier and more prosperous than children raised in any other household setting. (Read more from this story HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Republican Lawmaker: Sodomy Law Needed for Public Health

[Editor’s note: This excerpt is biased but is included for its news content] Texas Republican state Rep. James White has said that the state’s unconstitutional ban on same-sex sodomy should not be repealed for “public health” reasons and to stop bestiality.

The San Antonio-Express News recently asked White if he would support repealing the ban since he had filed a bill to rollback regulations on hair braiding.

Even though the Supreme Court struck down the sodomy law in its 2003 Lawrence v. Texas decision, White insisted that it should be kept on the books. The law specifically bans “deviant sexual intercourse with another individual of the same sex.”

“Absolutely, there is a difference,” White said, arguing that hair braiding regulations were “a way of disenfranchising them out of the marketplace. I don’t necessarily think this was the case with sodomy.”

According to the Republican lawmaker, the anti-gay law represented “a community coming together and having a moral standard, per se, as opposed to using the regulatory environment to disenfranchise people.” (Read more from “Republican Lawmaker: Anti-Gay Sodomy Law Needed for ‘Public Health’” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

After 3 Decades, Largest Presbyterian Denomination Approves Homosexual Marriage

After three decades of debate over its stance on homosexuality, members of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) voted on Tuesday to change the definition of marriage in the church’s constitution to include same-sex marriage.

The final approval by a majority of the church’s 171 regional bodies, known as presbyteries, enshrines a change recommended last year by the church’s General Assembly. The vote amends the church’s constitution to broaden marriage from being between “a man and a woman” to “two people, traditionally a man and a woman.”

The Presbytery of the Palisades, meeting in Fair Lawn, N.J., put the ratification count over the top on Tuesday on a voice vote. With many presbyteries still left to vote, the tally late Tuesday stood at 87 presbyteries in favor, 41 against and one tied.

“Finally, the church in its constitutional documents fully recognizes that the love of gays and lesbian couples is worth celebrating in the faith community,” said the Rev. Brian D. Ellison, executive director of the Covenant Network of Presbyterians, which advocates gay inclusion in the church. “There is still disagreement, and I don’t mean to minimize that, but I think we are learning that we can disagree and still be church together.”

The church, with about 1.8 million members, is the largest of the nation’s Presbyterian denominations, but it has been losing congregations and individual members as it has moved to the left theologically over the past several years. There was a wave of departures in and after 2011, when the presbyteries ratified a decision to ordain gays and lesbians as pastors, elders and deacons, and that may have cleared the way for Tuesday’s vote. (Read more from “Largest Presbyterian Denomination Gives Final Approval for Same-Sex Marriage” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Designer Duo Hit Back at ‘Hypocritical’ Elton in IVF Storm

Italian designers Dolce and Gabbana on Monday accused Elton John of being authoritarian, ignorant and hypocritical as a celebrity-driven row over IVF babies and gay adoption showed no sign of abating.

John, 67, stirred up a storm when he called for a boycott of the designer label in reaction to an interview in which Domenico Dolce referred to babies conceived through IVF as “synthetic”.

In Instagram comments that have been endorsed by celebrities including Victoria Beckham, Ricky Martin, Sharon Stone, Courtney Love and Martina Navratilova, the gay star accused the Italian duo of “wagging your judgemental little fingers at IVF.”

He added: “Your archaic thinking is out of step with the times, just like your fashions. I shall never wear Dolce and Gabbana ever again. #BoycottDolceGabbana.”

The hashtag was the top trending one on Twitter in Britain on Monday and in the top three in Italy, with most posts highly critical of the Italian duo. (Read more from “Designer Duo Hit Back at ‘Hypocritical’ Elton in IVF Storm” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

World’s First Three-Way Same-Sex Marriage, See the Disturbing Photos Here

Three gay men from Thailand have tied the knot in what is thought to be the world’s first three-way same-sex marriage.

Happy newlyweds Joke, 29, Bell, 21 and Art, 26, took the plunge on Valentine’s Day after exchanging their vows in a fairy-tale ceremony at their home in Uthai Thani Province, Thailand.

The three blushing grooms are thought to be the world’s only wedded male threesome and have since become internet sensations after photos from their big day went viral.

In what they described as the happiest day of their lives, the three men were suited and booted for the ceremony in which they exchanged rings after walking down the aisle.

Bell, From Phitsanulok Province, said: ‘I think we are first three-way same sex males to have a wedding, possibly in the world. (Read more about the three-way same-sex marriage HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

“ISIS Did It First”: California Lawyer Proposes Ballot to Execute Homosexuals

By AFP. A California lawyer has submitted a referendum proposal to outlaw homosexuality in the famously liberal western US state, on pain of execution.

The proposal — unlikely to advance, as it requires over 360,000 signatures to proceed — was submitted by attorney Matthew McLaughlin to the California Attorney General’s office last week.

“The abominable crime against nature known as buggery, called also sodomy, is a monstrous evil that Almighty God, giver of freedom and liberty, commands us to suppress on pain of our utter destruction even as he overthrew Sodom and Gomorrha,” reads the proposal, registered for comment on the attorney general’s website. (Read more about the California lawyer’s proposal to execute homosexuals HERE)


_____________________________________________________________

Gay Syrians Tell of ISIS Persecution

By Arwa Damon and Zeynep Bilginsoy. The photographs released by ISIS in its stronghold of Raqqa are dated March 2015. The first ones show a large crowd, mostly men, but also among them a handful of women and children, all looking up.

Three men on top of a building, faces covered in black balaclavas, stand on either side of their victim, while a fourth seems to be taking a photo or video.


Their victim is thrown off the building. In the last photograph, he is seen face down, surrounded by a small crowd of men, most carrying weapons, some with rocks in their hands. The caption reads “stoned to death.”

The victim brutally killed because he was accused of being gay.

There are at least half a dozen documented cases of men being similarly killed by ISIS. What’s even more sickening for Nour, a gay Syrian man, is the onlookers’ reaction. (Read more from this story HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.