Monthly Archives: June 2015

Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people.

Proverbs 14:34
God
Abram dwelled in the land of Canaan, and Lot dwelled in the cities of the plain, and pitched his tent toward Sodom. 
KJV Genesis 13:12

June 30, 2015 Watch the night sky for Amazing Star Alignment

Look West at sundown and beyond!
http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines-2015/rare-bethlehem-superstar-tonight-venus-and-jupiter-converging-for-first-time-in-2000-years

Congress Voted to Remove “country of origin” Labeling on Meat

The following comments are from a cyber bud who does her homework:

Excuse me. What the #$$%^ is the sold out congress doing to American consumers? Can’t help but wonder where the sold out souls of congressional liars and thieves, who voted for this atrocious bill get their meat? How do I know this is true?  I finally made the calls today to “thank” all eleven house members that have been kicked off of various house committees by Speaker Boehner and  for standing up to liar Boehner. I asked the nice young lady in Fl. Rep. Nugent’s office if it was true that congress voted to stop labeling meat in the USA. She said yes, the vote took place two weeks ago and that Rep. Nugent is most unhappy.

Anyway, folks, the lousy Republican House leadership sucks.  They don’t give a dang about the safety of the food Americans eat, and voted for this dirty deal. Who knows, Americans could soon be receiving ground up seasoned rat food from China sold as hamburger with no idea of what country or origin the poisoned food came from.

Congress to the consumer. You don’t deserve to know where your meat is coming from.
meat

Congress Voted to Remove "country of origin" Labeling on Meat

The following comments are from a cyber bud who does her homework:
Excuse me. What the #$$%^ is the sold out congress doing to American consumers? Can’t help but wonder where the sold out souls of congressional liars and thieves, who voted for this atrocious bill get their meat? How do I know this is true?  I finally made the calls today to “thank” all eleven house members that have been kicked off of various house committees by Speaker Boehner and  for standing up to liar Boehner. I asked the nice young lady in Fl. Rep. Nugent’s office if it was true that congress voted to stop labeling meat in the USA. She said yes, the vote took place two weeks ago and that Rep. Nugent is most unhappy.
Anyway, folks, the lousy Republican House leadership sucks.  They don’t give a dang about the safety of the food Americans eat, and voted for this dirty deal. Who knows, Americans could soon be receiving ground up seasoned rat food from China sold as hamburger with no idea of what country or origin the poisoned food came from.
Congress to the consumer. You don’t deserve to know where your meat is coming from.
meat

Image

Almost Done

screw

Alabama Civil Rights lawyer’s epic rant: Media targeted Confederate flag because Charleston didn’t riot

Written by  for YELLOWHAMMERNEWS.COM
flag
Alabamian and Civil Rights attorney Temple Trueblood took to Facebook Thursday to share her thoughts on how, and why, the media has targeted the Confederate battle flag in the wake of the Charleston shooting.
Her brilliant insight is already going viral, with thousands of shares from her personal Facebook page.
Without further ado:

I’m a Southerner. I’m a civil rights lawyer. I’ve stayed out of this fray and, to be honest, I’m really tired of the whole media frenzy.
With that said–taking out soapbox…pontificating….
The media did not get what it wanted from the South as a result of the Charleston tragedy. The good people of Charleston did not riot, did not engage in hateful shenanigans and did not provide the racist fueled fodder for their 24 hour-a-day headlines.
Poor, poor media–no Ferguson, no Trayvon Martin, no Oscar Grants. Instead, the good people of Charleston and of South Carolina unified and came together–all races, all creeds. They marched hand in hand to pay respect to the poor souls lost and to strengthen their community.
In short–they did what Southerners do. They put their faith forward and did the right thing ‘cause their mommas raised them right.
So, what are they left to do? Well, the Confederate flag seems like a fine substitute–and it worked.
Now, don’t get me wrong; I don’t think the Confederate flag has any place flying over any governmental building for several reasons:
(1) the Confederacy was a briefly lived nation–they lost the war–they don’t exist anymore…hello???
(2) the only flags that should fly over any governmental buildings in the United States are those of the United States and the sovereign State itself, let alone that of a defunct government (see No. 1); and
(3) regardless of what an individual’s intention is regarding the Confederate flag, it is a symbol of governmental oppression to many in this nation as recently as only 1-2 generations ago so a present day governmental unit flying it is…well…not good. Period.
But (you knew there would be a “but,” right?), if an individual wants to own, fly, wear, burn, or otherwise have emblazoned on them a tattoo of the Confederate flag then Hell–knock yourself out. It’s not my place (or anyone else’s) to tell you that you can’t do that.
Are all people who display or own a Confederate flag racist? No.
Are there racists who display and own Confederate flags. Yes.
Can it be offensive? Yes.
Does that mean that all Confederate flags are to be banned or wiped out? Well, of course not. This is America…remember?
And get this–once again, the South did not give the media machine what it wanted. South Carolina removed the flag, followed almost immediately by Alabama….ALABAMA, people!
But are the media mongers gushing over the progressive character of these moves…no. Now they are calling for the removal of the flag from the General Lee….dude, it’s the Dukes of Hazzard…a show that stopped running, oh, THIRTY years ago.
Ok…whatever. But then they are calling for historical monuments related to the Civil War to be removed.
This is called rewriting history.
This is bad….ask Ray Bradbury (and if you don’t know what I’m talking about read Fahrenheit 451). I won’t even launch into that, but you get my gist.
Should the Lincoln Memorial be destroyed? Should the hundreds of Civil War monuments spread across this nation honoring the tens of thousand who died (on both sides) be eradicated? Of course not.
Look, there are plenty of things that people do and that are part of the mainstream American life that offend me to my core (Kardashians, anyone?) but that doesn’t mean they should be obliterated.
I find it personally reprehensible and offensive to my very being when I see people burn the American flag, stomp on the American flag, rip up the American flag, toss the American flag in the garbage, or even wear it in some version of cut off shorts barely covering their hoo-ha. But, do they have a right to do all of those things? Yes.
Does every person who owns or reads a Quran follow extreme Islam and plot the death of all Infidels (that’s you and me, by the way…)? No. A
re there Islamic extremists who do plot and carry out the death to all Infidels who own and read the Quran? You betcha’.
Again, does that mean that all vestiges of Islam should be eradicated from the United States. Um, no.
There are plenty of music lyrics (rap, metal and pop) that as a woman I find personally degrading, threatening and flat out inhuman misogyny.
Do I think that every single person that listens to this music, owns it or blares it at 11 million decibels in traffic treats all women as subhuman or wants to rape, kill and murder me? No.
Are there some people out there who do view women as subhuman who listen to this stuff? Sure.
Again, does that mean it should all be banned, the musicians locked away and all vestiges of their existence erased? Please.
So, as you are jumping on the current media-hyped-frenzied band wagon just stop and think…for yourself. For like a second. Use some common sense. Don’t be a cog in the machine and help them create an even bigger division in this nation than they already have.

 

15 Reasons ‘Marriage Equality’ Is About Neither Marriage Nor Equality

Don’t fall for the ‘marriage equality’ sales pitch. It’s a deception.
By Stella Morabito for THE FEDERALIST
15 Reasons ‘Marriage Equality’ Is About Neither Marriage Nor Equality
Same-sex marriage is a notion that contains within itself the seeds of its own destruction. I doubt many have thought this through, with the ironic exception of the elites who have been pushing the agenda the hardest.
Most people are weary of it all and going along to get along, especially since dissent has become such a socially expensive proposition, almost overnight. That in itself should deeply concern anyone who values freedom of expression.
Sure, true believers scattered across the land really do think the entire project ends with allowing same-sex couples to marry. Most persist in the blind faith that a federal ban on the standard definition of marriage will have no negative effect on family autonomy and privacy. That’s a pipe dream.
The same-sex marriage agenda is more like a magic bullet with a trajectory that will abolish civil marriage for everyone, and in doing so, will embed central planning into American life. And that, my friends, is the whole point of it. Along with Obamacare, net neutrality, and Common Core, genderless marriage is a blueprint for regulating life, particularly family life.
The Rainbow’s Arc
Unintended consequences usually come about when we are ignorant or maybe lazy about a course of action. But we usually crash land after following an arc of logic, which in this case has gone largely undiscerned and unaddressed in the public square.
Americans are in a fog about how marriage equality will lead to more central planning and thought policing. This is partly because the media and Hollywood only provide slogans to regurgitate while academics and judges push politically correct speech codes to obey.
Let’s explore the fallout of that arc of faulty logic. Included below are some 15 of the gaping holes in the “marriage equality” reasoning that Americans have not thought through.

  1. The Kids Are Not Alright

In March, six adult children from LGBT households filed amicus briefs opposing genderless marriage: see here, here, and here. You can read testimonials of many such children in a newly released anthology by Robert Oscar Lopez and Rivka Edelman, “Jephthah’s Daughters: Innocent Casualties in the War for Family ‘Equality.’”
Whenever a parent is missing—for whatever reason—a child feels a primal wound. In this respect, parents belong to their children more than children belong to their parents. We ought to recognize that privileges of civil marriage should ultimately exist for children, not for adults. Children have the right to know their origins and not to be treated as commodities. Same-sex parenting—which increasingly involves human trafficking, particularly with artificial reproductive technologies (see number eight)—deliberately deprives a child of a mother and/or a father. The “marriage equality” agenda requires that such children bear that burden alone and repress their primal wound in silence.

  1. Love’s Got Nothing to Do with State Interest in Marriage

“Love is love” is an empty slogan when it comes to state interest in marriage. How two people feel about one another is none of the state’s business. The state’s interest is limited to the heterosexual union because that’s the only union that produces the state’s citizenry.
And it still is, whether the union happens traditionally or in a petri dish. Each and every one of us—equally and without exception—only exists through the heterosexual union. In any free and functioning society, there is a state interest in encouraging as much as possible those who sire and bear us to be responsible for raising us.

  1. The Infertility Canard

Just as the state has no litmus test for feelings or motives, it has no litmus test for any heterosexual couple who do not produce children because of intent, infertility, or age. Conflating same-sex couples with childless or elderly heterosexual couples seems to be the fallacy of composition: claiming something must be true of the whole because it’s true of some part of the whole.
Sorry, but the heterosexual union, no matter how it takes place, is the only way any citizen exists, including intersex and transgender citizens. So recognizing that union without prejudice remains the only reason for state interest in marriage.

  1. Same-Sex Marriage Will Settle Nothing

It’s only the starting point for a glut of philosophically related demands for state recognition and approval of many other types of relationships, including polygamy and incest. This will mark the sudden beginning of an even more sudden end for same-sex marriage, not so much because those other types of relationships prove immoral, but because they serve as exhibits for the argument that all civil marriage—including same-sex marriage—is unsustainable and discriminatory.

  1. ‘Marriage Equality’ Opens the Path for ‘Unmarried Equality’

There’s a movement waiting in the wings called “unmarried equality,” which argues that all civil marriage should be abolished because it privileges married people over singles. If same-sex marriage becomes the law of the land, it will set the precedent for abolishing marriage. Far from getting the state out of the marriage business, it will invite the state to regulate all familial relationships, particularly those with children. Once the state doesn’t have to recognize your marriage, it is freer to treat your spouse and children as strangers to you.

  1.  Transgenderism Is a Big Part of This Package

Americans have not thought through the implications of same-sex marriage and how it is logically a big step to erasing all sex distinctions in law. If we become legally sexless, the implications are vast when it comes to how or whether the state will recognize family relationships such as mother, father, son, or daughter. There’s already a push to eliminate sex identification at birth, which could mean removing sex distinctions on birth certificates. This will seem logical because all gender identity non-discrimination laws already presume that everybody’s sex is something arbitrarily “assigned” to them at birth.

  1. It’s an Open Invitation for State Licensing of Parents

If we allow the abolition of sex distinctions and civil marriage—both of which are written into the social DNA of same-sex marriage—we logically allow the state to gain greater control over deciding familial relationships. Civil marriage so far has presumed that a child born into a heterosexual union has the default right to be raised by his biological parents together. How can the presumption of maternity or paternity survive in a legal system that recognizes neither sex distinctions nor a marriage relationship?
The bellwethers are out there. MSNBC anchor Melissa Harris-Perry did a “Forward” spot for the Obama administration in which she stated that all children “belong” to communities, not families. Another friend of the Obama administration, gender legal theorist Martha Fineman, calls for state-subsidized care-giving units to replace marriage and the family.

  1.  Same-Sex Marriage Commodifies Children

You may think artificial reproductive technologies (ART) are fine as an avenue to obtain children for those unable to conceive. But in the context of genderless marriage, ART ramps up the potential for human trafficking. Check anonymousus.com to read testimonies of grief and loss felt by children who were conceived in this manner. Check the movies “Eggsploitation” and “Breeders” by the Center for Bioethics and Culture to hear stories of the exploitation of women in the industry. There is definitely an element of human bondage in all of this, particularly because human beings are being deliberately separated from their mothers and fathers, in a way that echoes the wounds of slavery’s separations and the search for one’s roots.

  1. It Sets a Head-On Collision Course with Freedom of Religion

The handwriting is on the wall. You need only reflect on how a screaming mob managed to conjure up total surrender from Indiana Gov. Mike Pence so he would reject that state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Catholic Charities is closing its adoption services where same-sex marriage laws pressure them to reject their church’s teachings about marriage and family. Owners of businesses that serve the wedding industry are being forced to either scrap their consciences or shut their doors. Anti-discrimination lawsuits against churches that don’t perform same-sex marriages will undoubtedly increase.

  1. It Sets a Collision Course for Freedom of Speech and Press

Campus speech codes. Social punishment. Firing Brendan Eich as CEO of Mozilla for discovering his thought crime of privately believing in marriage six years prior. The utter compliance of virtually every big business in America, every media outlet, every pundit who is permitted to have a voice in the public square.

  1. It’s Especially On a Collision Course with Freedom of Association

I already mentioned that abolishing civil marriage, along with legal sex distinctions, puts the government in a better position to regulate familial relationships, and probably to license parents. If we think deeply about these things, it’s hard to avoid the fact that freedom of association begins with family autonomy, a place where the state is supposed to leave you alone in your most intimate relationships. It’s hard to see how freedom of association is not affected, especially when PC speech codes have everyone constantly checking their chit chat with neighbors, co-workers, and classmates. At Marquette University, staff were told that any conversation or remarks construed to be against same-sex marriage were to be reported to Human Resources, even if just inadvertently overheard.

  1. Same-Sex Kills Privacy by Growing Bureaucracy

With the erosion of family autonomy practically guaranteed by the rainbow arc of same-sex marriage, private life will tend to evaporate, just as it always does in centrally planned societies. Distrust grows because people fear punishment for expressing dissenting views. The emphasis on political correctness in the name of equality, coupled with an ever-growing bureaucracy, is a perfect environment in which to percolate a surveillance society.

  1. It’s Meant to Be a Global Agenda

The United States is already punishing countries and threatening to cut off aid if they don’t accept the LGBT agenda. This is especially true of developing countries, in which the whole idea is foreign to over 95 percent of the population. According to a report by Rep. Steve Stockman, corroborated by a Pentagon official, the administration held back critical intelligence from Nigeria which would have aided in locating girls kidnapped by Boko Haram. The new National Security Strategy recently released by the White House makes clear that the LGBT agenda is a global agenda. And it looks a lot like cultural imperialism of the worst kind.

  1. It Promises a Monolithic Society of Conformity

In the past year or two, everyone with something to lose by opposing same-sex marriage—with the honorable exception of Eich—seems to have scuttled their principles. Five years ago, the American Psychological Association voted 157-0—that’s right, ZERO—to support genderless marriage. For an excellent assessment of what this sort of conformity means for a free society, read Brendan O’Neill’s article in Spiked, entitled “Gay Marriage: A Case Study in Conformism.” The agenda was imposed by elites, entirely due to a methodical blitzkrieg of programs and enforcement dictated from above. Same-sex marriage simply could not come about without suppressing dissent in all of our institutions.

  1. Expect More Severe Punishment for Dissent

If you think the bullying of businesses, churches, and individuals who don’t get with the LGBT program now is bad, it promises to get much worse once codified. Is this really the sort of society you wish to live in? Where expressing an opinion from your heart on faith, family, marriage, relationships, love, or the very nature of reality—is routinely attacked as hate speech? Because that is exactly what you need to expect.
Justice Anthony Kennedy made it very clear in his words of the Windsor decision that any dissent on same-sex marriage was tantamount to animus. It is but a short step from presuming animus to punishing dissent.
So perhaps the biggest question hanging in the air is this: What will the authorities decide to do to dissenters?
 

Obamacare’s Best Allies: The Courts and the Republicans

By ruling for the government in the case of King v. Burwell, the Supreme Court once again tied itself into rhetorical and logical knots to defend Obamacare.

By ruling for the government in the case of King v. Burwell, the Supreme Court once again tied itself into rhetorical and logical knots to defend Obamacare. In King, the court disregarded Obamacare’s clear language regarding eligibility for federal health care subsides, on the grounds that enforcing the statute as written would cause havoc in the marketplace. The court found that Congress could not have intended this result and that the court needed to uphold Congress’s mythical intention and ignore Obamacare’s actual language.
While Obamacare may be safe from court challenges, its future is far from assured. As Obamacare forces more Americans to pay higher insurance premiums while causing others to lose their insurance or lose access to the physicians of their choice, opposition to Obamacare will grow. Additional Americans will turn against Obamacare as their employers reduce their hours, along with their paychecks, because of Obamacare’s mandates.
As dissatisfaction with Obamacare grows, there will be renewed efforts to pass a single-payer health care system. Single-payer advocates will point to Obamacare’s corporatist features as being responsible for its failures and claim the only solution is to get the private sector completely out of health care.
Unfortunately, many Republicans will inadvertently aid the single-payer advocates by failing to acknowledge that Obamacare is not socialist but corporatist, and that that the pre-Obamacare health care system was hobbled by government intervention. In fact, popular support for Obamacare was rooted in the desire to address problems created by prior government interference in the health care marketplace.
Republicans also help the cause of socialized medicine by pretending that Obamacare can be fixed with minor reforms. These Republicans do not understand that replacing Obamacare with “Obamacare Lite” will still leave millions of Americans with inadequate access to quality health care, and could strengthen the movement for a single-payer system.
Republicans’ failure to advocate for a free-market health care system is not just rooted in intellectual error and political cowardice. The insurance industry, the pharmaceutical industry, and the other special interests that benefit from a large government role in health care are just as — or perhaps even more — influential in the Republican Party as in the Democratic Party. The influence of these interests is one reason why, despite their free-market rhetoric, Republicans have a long history of expanding the government’s role in health care.
Those who think a Republican president and Congress will enact free-market health care should consider that the last time Republicans controlled Congress and the White House their signature health care achievement was to expand federal health care spending and entitlements. Furthermore, Richard Nixon worked with Ted Kennedy to force all health care plans to offer a health maintenance organization (HMO). Even Obamacare’s individual mandate originated in a conservative think tank and was first signed into law by a Republican governor.
Instead of Obamacare Lite, Congress should support giving individuals direct control over their health care dollars through individual health care tax credits and expanded access to health savings accounts. Other reforms like long-term group insurance could ensure that those with “pre-existing conditions” have access to care. Another good reform is negative outcomes insurance that could help resolve the medical malpractice crisis.
America’s health care system is just as unsustainable as our foreign policy and our monetary system. At some point, the financial and human costs of Obamacare will prove overwhelming and Congress will be forced to replace this system. Hopefully, before this happens, a critical mass of people will convince Congress to replace Obamacare with a truly free-market health care system.
 
 

SEXUAL DEVIANT “MARRIAGE”, ROE v. WADE, PROHIBITION

By: Devvy
June 29, 2015
NewsWithViews.com

Stop sexual deviants using science to debunk the big lie

As we all can see, sexual deviants are becoming more aggressive in trampling our God-given rights backed up by ignorant and/or activist judges, both at the state and federal level. Part of the reason why is more sexual deviants are being elected or appointed to judgeships.

Allow me to do a little back story here because it’s critically important Americans understand how they’ve been manipulated into believing something that is not true. George Orwell defined it as doublethink:

“Doublethink is the act of ordinary people simultaneously accepting two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct, often in distinct social contexts. Doublethink is related to, but differs from, hypocrisy and neutrality. Somewhat related but almost the opposite is cognitive dissonance, where contradictory beliefs cause conflict in one’s mind. Doublethink is notable due to a lack of cognitive dissonance — thus the person is completely unaware of any conflict or contradiction.

“According to the novel, doublethink is: “The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them… To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies – all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.”

For 37 years, Exodus International was a leading voice in helping sexual deviants turn away from sin and their dangerous sexual preferences. On June 19, 2013, that organization announced they were not only closing their doors, their president, Alan Chambers, actually apologized to sexual deviants for their decades of helping the lost and confused. The reason made me want to gag. Doublethink.

In order to sell something so toxic, you have to market the product in a way that becomes acceptable to the masses using a lot of positive images. After all, telling youngsters and pre-teens anal sex can expose you to HIV/AIDS isn’t the picture leaders of the sexual deviant movement want to portray. They want to parade “funny” people like Ellen DeGeneres into your living room to show you how normal lesbians are, just regular Americans. Add a media icon like Oprah selling the message on her show reaching millions of empty headed women and the advancement of the cause increases in a big way.

The term ‘sexual preference’ was used until 1992, when the battle for a constitutional amendment was raging in Colorado. Sexual deviants were losing that fight because opponents reminded voters that sexual deviants preferred, their own words, unnatural sex. That’s when a new marketing term was born: ‘sexual orientation’ to promote the pervasive lie “born that way” to sway voters. It didn’t work, we passed Amendment Two to the Colorado State Constitution; activist judges then over turned the will of the people.

As time went by, more clever marketing came into play and the word ‘gay’ was birthed to make Americans forget homosexuals have sex in each other’s feces; I refer to it as bowel movement sex. From there the next step in marketing became comparing ‘sexual orientation’ to the civil rights movement. If one is born with black skin, they simply cannot wake up one day and declare themselves to be Caucasian and vice-a-versa. God made humans with different color skin, all equal in his eyes as it should be in everyone’s. You can’t simply decide one day to change your race to another race. The militant sexual deviant movement has tried to make that one stick, but thankfully, a large number of Americans, black and white, haven’t drank the poison:

Civil Rights Activist: ‘No Comparison’ Between Civil Rights, Gay Rights Movement

Sodomites claim claim they are born that way and have no choice in their attraction to men instead of a woman. The same for lesbians. They claim just as someone with black or white skin, they have no choice. Really? Thousands of sodomites and lesbians have left their destructive, preferred life styles. Actress Anne Heche used to have sex with Ellen DeGeneres. Ms. Heche then went on to marry a man, have a child. Unfortunately, she divorced, allegedly due to a new relationship, not with a woman, but with a man. So, which way was Ms. Heche born? Another clear example I can give you that it’s a choice and not an “accident” of birth is the candor of WNBA star Sheryl Swoopes. In an interview following her “coming out” in 2005, this was the exchange:

Interviewer: “You have said that you don’t believe you were born gay, which, as you said, may confuse many people. How do you believe you came to be gay?”

SW: “I think there are a lot of people — gays and lesbians — who believe you are born that way. I think there also a lot of people who believe it’s a choice. And, for me, I believe it was a choice. I was at a point in my life where I had gone through a divorce and was not in a relationship, and the choice I made happened to be that I fell in love with another woman. It might confuse some people, and some people may not understand that, but I think in life, no matter what it is that you’re doing, you always have a choice and you make that choice and you have to live with that choice. And it just happened that, you know, my partner and I were really, really good friends, and the more we hung out, the more we did stuff together, my feelings grew stronger and stronger for her, and it got to a point to where I said, “I can’t fight this any more.”

Ms. Swoopes made the choice of embracing sin because she wanted to, not because she was born that way. But, wait! Ms. Swoopes has been engaged to a man since 2011. So, I guess she’s not “gay” anymore.

Ignorant, useful fools in NYC just elected a died in the wool Marxist for their next mayor, Bill De Blasio. His wife, Chirlane McCray, is a “former” lesbian. Angelina Jolie used to have sex with a female; now she’s engaged to Brad Pitt. Amber Heard has sex with men and women; her current partner is Johnny Depp. Makes your head spin.

Lawrence v Texas (2003) went all the way to the un-Supreme Court and is worth mentioning here:

“In her opinion, Justice O’Connor did not deny that homosexuality is a voluntarily chosen “lifestyle” –a startling admission. In his highly acclaimed work, “How to Dethrone the Imperial Judiciary,” legal scholar and constitutional attorney, Dr. Edwin Vieira sums up the Lawrence decision:

“Rather the majority opinion in Lawrence “effectively decrees the end of all legislation” based on morals of any kind. For if morality cannot be invoked as a legitimate basis for legislation in a sexual-morality case, how can it be invoked in any other? Surely the particular area of conduct to which We the People address their moral judgments cannot determine the constitutional outcome.

“Thus, perforce of Lawrence, in the future to constitute “due process of law” as a basis for limiting “liberty,” all legislation must be amoral – that is, all legislation must demonstrably serve some goal other than a concededly moral one. A “wall of separation” between morality and state must be thrown up and maintained.

“Therefore, the Lawrence majority’s repudiation of the history of Western civilization and Christian moral and ethical standards amounted to repudiation of the Declaration of Independence and consequently the Constitution, and consequently again, the justices’ own authority – further proof that whom the gods would destroy they first make mad.”

“In the Lawrence decision, the Supreme Court not only came up with one of the most convoluted, toxic decisions of the past century, it went much deeper than that. This was an all out attack on states’ rights. This decision was so putrid, it should have caused a massive uproar from every Christian, minister, pastor and priest in this country and demand for removal of half the U.S. Supreme Court. The silence has been deafening. This decision not only bodes something akin to a death knell for America’s moral foundation, the injection of international law into America’s judicial system has set an unbelievably dangerous precedent.”

Countless lawsuits have been filed over the past decade by Christians who refuse to genuflect at the altar of political correctness. Some cases have been won on religious grounds, others who know the Bible is God’s words and His Commandments haven’t been so lucky:

Supremes asked to halt ‘compelled’ lesbian speech

“The U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to restore religious and speech freedoms in New Mexico, where the state Supreme Court recently ruled that abandoning one’s freedom is just the “price of citizenship.” The dispute centers on the refusal by Elaine Huguenin, co-owner with her husband, Jonathan, of Elane Photography, to memorialize a same-sex ceremony planned by Vanessa Willock. Willock, who found another photographer for the event, filed a complaint with the state under its anti-discrimination law. The state Supreme Court said the photographer had no right to not be forced to express statements through her work that violated her Christian beliefs.”

The attack on Christianity in this country is reaching the level of fanaticism. Americans are losing their businesses because their religious beliefs are being trampled by thugs on the bench:

‘Bible-Thumping…B**ch’: Bakers Who Refused to Make Gay Couple’s Wedding Cake Shut Down Their Shop Following Threats

“In May, The Blaze told you about Aaron and Melissa Klein, owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa, an Oregon-based bakery that has fallen under intense scrutiny. Throughout 2013, the Christian couple and their business have been in the midst of a media firestorm after refusing to make a wedding cake for a lesbian couple. From threats to vicious phone calls and e-mails, the Klein family has been inundated with angry responses. Now, Aaron and Melissa have announced that they are shutting down their shop.”

Those ‘tolerant’ sexual deviants who demand everyone else give up their religious beliefs so less than 2% of the population can run rough shod over the entire country displayed the usual hate towards anyone who disagrees with their filthy sexual preferences:

“From proclamations that Aaron should be shot to one apparent threat that he be raped, the hate and angst being thrown the Klein family’s way is certainly serious in nature. Some have even wished for the couple’s five children to be stricken with illness. Earlier this summer, Aaron and Melissa shared a number of these e-mails with The Blaze. “You stupid bible-thumping, hypocritical b**ch. I hope your kids get really, really, sick and you go out of business,” read one e-mail. “Here’s hoping you go out of business, you bigot. Enjoy hell,” read another.”

Bigot? Reminds me of this quote: “It’s better to be silent and presumed a fool than to open your mouth and doubt removed altogether.” The List of 7 by Mark Frost

Sexual deviants have always had an agenda. One is to get a foot hold in public schools; they have succeeded with ease. Predators trolling schools across the country for fresh recruits. Since sexual deviants don’t reproduce; their goal is to brainwash your child(ren) into adopting a dangerous lifestyle of filth and sin. A whole lot of those grade school students are now on college campuses continuing the push for deviancy and spreading diseases and AIDS/HIV. Second and of utmost importance:

‘Gays’ admit ENDA game: Outlaw Christian morality – The religious liberty death spiral continues.

“One of the most dangerous and discriminatory pieces of legislation in modern times – the ironically tagged “Employment Non-Discrimination Act,” or ENDA – passed the U.S. Senate on Thursday by a vote of 64-32. Ten Republicans disgracefully joined liberal Democrats in this effort to ultimately outlaw the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic.

“According to its leftist proponents, ENDA would merely insulate people who choose to engage in homosexual conduct (sexual orientation) or those who suffer from gender confusion (gender identity) against employment intolerance. In truth, however, this legislation effectively would codify the very thing it purports to combat: workplace discrimination.

“Writing in the Huffington Post, popular homosexual radio personality Michelangelo Signorile confessed that, of any potential ENDA legislation that might reach President Obama’s desk for his pledged signature, “none should include any religious exemptions” whatsoever.

“If Signorile and other “LGBT” activists get their way, this would mean that churches, mosques, synagogues, religious schools, Bible bookstores, as well as any and every other business in America with 15 or more employees, would be forced, under penalty of law, to abandon the biblical and traditional-values viewpoint on human sexuality, and hire (and otherwise not offend) those who openly flaunt expressly sinful and demonstrably self-destructive sexual behaviors.”

Communism can only survive in a God-less country where the ‘state’ becomes the parents and total authority over what you can and cannot say, think or feel. The push to Sovietize these united States of America is all but a fait accompli. Normalizing and legalizing sexual deviancy has always been a top goal:

The revolution of the family: the Marxist roots of ‘homosexualism’ (Do take the time to read the full column)

“I have been asked recently “what is homosexualism?” I started using the term in my writing on these issues a few years ago when it became clear that we were dealing not with a group of people, but with a particular ideology that is often held by people who are not themselves homosexuals.

“A few days ago in The Guardian, Peter Tatchell wrote a pretty good description not only of that ideology’s goals but its origins. This political ideology, often called “queer theory” by its proponents in academia, is what is being pushed, quite openly these days, by the “gay rights” movement. Despite what we are told all day by their collaborators in the mainstream media, from the six o’clock news to your favourite sit-com, this movement is not about “equal rights”. It is about re-writing the foundational concepts of our entire society. I predict that it will not be much longer before the pretense of “equality” is dropped, having done its work.

“Many people are scratching their heads and asking how we have suddenly found ourselves at the point where two men can be “married,” a woman can be called a “husband” and a man, a “wife,” and children are reduced to political bargaining chips in the adoption wars, when it seems just yesterday we were only talking about equal rights. Since when do “equal rights” mean deconstructing, dismantling, these foundational social concepts?

“If we read them closely, however, the activists themselves have begun to explain it in quite straightforward terms. For them, it has never been about “equal rights” but about the re-writing of our entire social order. The “gay rights” movement has always been, in Peter Tatchell’s own words, “revolutionary, not reformist.”

“Others have pointed out the Marxist origins of the Sexual Revolution as a whole, and it is clear that the sudden explosion of homosexualism is merely the next logical step in a systematic programme. A close cousin to radical feminism and grandchild of Marxism, homosexualism was developed out of the politico-academic pseudo-field of “gender studies” and has, for 30 or 40 years, been pushed on a mostly unwilling public, through “anti-discrimination” and “equalities” legislation by a coalition of lobbyists, NGOs and politicians on the extreme left, and in increasingly powerful international circles.”

The one issue sexual deviants stay away from is science because it’s the fatal blow to the big lie of born that way.

Decades ago, Simon LeVey, a homosexual and author of Queer Science, attempted to use science to prove sexual deviants are born that way. LeVey’s science has been highly criticized over the years, yet sexual deviates held up LeVey as the scientific genius proving “born that way.” However, many forgot LeVey’s own words on that: “It’s important to stress what I didn’t find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn’t show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work.”

Please take the time to read the two articles below because it IS the issue that must become a legal one:

Identical twin studies prove homosexuality is not genetic

“Eight major studies of identical twins in Australia, the U.S., and Scandinavia during the last two decades all arrive at the same conclusion: gays were not born that way….

“Because identical twins are always genetically identical, homosexuality cannot be genetically dictated. “No-one is born gay,” he notes. “The predominant things that create homosexuality in one identical twin and not in the other have to be post-birth factors.” Dr. Whitehead believes same-sex attraction (SSA) is caused by “non-shared factors,” things happening to one twin but not the other, or a personal response to an event by one of the twins and not the other.

“For example, one twin might have exposure to pornography or sexual abuse, but not the other. One twin may interpret and respond to their family or classroom environment differently than the other. “These individual and idiosyncratic responses to random events and to common environmental factors predominate,” he says.”

This is the Way God Made Me”- A Scientific Examination of Homosexuality and the “Gay Gene

“Consider the obvious problem of survival for individuals who allegedly possess a gay gene: individuals who have partners of the same sex are biologically unable to reproduce (without resorting to artificial means). Therefore, if an alleged “gay gene” did exist, the homosexual population eventually would disappear altogether. We now know that it is not scientifically accurate to refer to a “gay gene” as the causative agent in homosexuality. The available evidence clearly establishes that no such gene has been identified. Additionally, evidence exists which documents that homosexuals can change their sexual orientation. Future decisions regarding policies about, and/or treatment of, homosexuals should reflect this knowledge.”

But, of course, it’s exactly those scientific findings sexual deviants don’t want in the court room. There goes the bogus “civil rights” argument as well as the “I was born that way” falsehood – the main staples of the sexual deviant crowd in selling their toxic sexual behavior to children, parents, lawmakers and the courts. Strip away the “born that way” by science and there goes the sympathy factor. It also pins judges to science instead of religion.

Sexual deviants and their supporters always resort to name calling (homophobic or worse) in response to opposition to their preferred, dangerous sexual preferences. Bring up the issue of science and they go ballistic. This isn’t about not liking a sodomite or lesbian. I have met several over the years who seem to be really nice people. I don’t (and never have) called them ugly names like faggot. I do pity them because God has called what they do an abomination and they risk spending eternity in hell. This isn’t about being nice, it’s about science. It’s also about saving lives.

HIV/AIDS is preventable and so are the dozens and dozens of ‘lavender’ diseases which plague sodomites: Medical Consequences of What Homosexuals Do. Horrific, and yet, sodomites continue spreading those horrible medical problems and diseases. Sodomy should be declared a national health issue and condemned, not celebrated. Instead the U.S. government and Department of Defense are the biggest promoters in the world of HIV/AIDS and all the diseases spread by sexual deviants.

If I were a business owner like the two cited at the top of this column or any other individual or entity charged with discrimination, I wouldn’t just put all my eggs in the religion basket (although it is absolutely the right of those folks to protect their religious beliefs), I would also make the case in court that sexual deviants are not born that way. How can you discriminate against someone for a behavior they choose to engage in?

Should priests, pastors or even a judge of the peace be forced to “marry” individuals who claim they were born to have sex with dogs or horses or children or other deviant acts? Where will it end? Just say, I’m born that way and all is excused? I think not. It’s time to put science at the top of the legal battle and expose the truth.

I have included another appendix of items you might have missed. Click here.

There is help for sexual deviants who sincerely wish to turn their lives around:

1 – Homosexuals Anonymous
2 – P-FOX (Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays) also offer resources and support.
3 – The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality

[Just a short note about 9/11. The cost of America’s undeclared “war” (invasion) in Afghanistan has now reached $1 trillion borrowed dollars – massive debt heaped on us all based on what happened on 9/11. Regular readers of my column know I continue to press for the truth about the events of 9/11. Military grade nanothermite is not a conspiracy theory. It was found and tested from the rubble at the twin towers. A new, powerful film has been released: The Anatomy of a Great Deception. For full disclosure I receive no compensation, but I want you to get a copy (or a few) and share it with others or give a copy as a present. I’ve purchased half a dozen copies and given them to individuals I believe seek the truth. It’s very powerful simply because it’s one ‘ordinary’ man’s story who ask a simple question that led him to a not so simple journey. There is factual information in this film that many have never heard about but everyone should. Just a suggestion, order more than one and give one to a friend.]

SEXUAL DEVIANT "MARRIAGE", ROE v. WADE, PROHIBITION

By: Devvy
June 29, 2015
NewsWithViews.com

Stop sexual deviants using science to debunk the big lie

As we all can see, sexual deviants are becoming more aggressive in trampling our God-given rights backed up by ignorant and/or activist judges, both at the state and federal level. Part of the reason why is more sexual deviants are being elected or appointed to judgeships.

Allow me to do a little back story here because it’s critically important Americans understand how they’ve been manipulated into believing something that is not true. George Orwell defined it as doublethink:

“Doublethink is the act of ordinary people simultaneously accepting two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct, often in distinct social contexts. Doublethink is related to, but differs from, hypocrisy and neutrality. Somewhat related but almost the opposite is cognitive dissonance, where contradictory beliefs cause conflict in one’s mind. Doublethink is notable due to a lack of cognitive dissonance — thus the person is completely unaware of any conflict or contradiction.

“According to the novel, doublethink is: “The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them… To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies – all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.”

For 37 years, Exodus International was a leading voice in helping sexual deviants turn away from sin and their dangerous sexual preferences. On June 19, 2013, that organization announced they were not only closing their doors, their president, Alan Chambers, actually apologized to sexual deviants for their decades of helping the lost and confused. The reason made me want to gag. Doublethink.

In order to sell something so toxic, you have to market the product in a way that becomes acceptable to the masses using a lot of positive images. After all, telling youngsters and pre-teens anal sex can expose you to HIV/AIDS isn’t the picture leaders of the sexual deviant movement want to portray. They want to parade “funny” people like Ellen DeGeneres into your living room to show you how normal lesbians are, just regular Americans. Add a media icon like Oprah selling the message on her show reaching millions of empty headed women and the advancement of the cause increases in a big way.

The term ‘sexual preference’ was used until 1992, when the battle for a constitutional amendment was raging in Colorado. Sexual deviants were losing that fight because opponents reminded voters that sexual deviants preferred, their own words, unnatural sex. That’s when a new marketing term was born: ‘sexual orientation’ to promote the pervasive lie “born that way” to sway voters. It didn’t work, we passed Amendment Two to the Colorado State Constitution; activist judges then over turned the will of the people.

As time went by, more clever marketing came into play and the word ‘gay’ was birthed to make Americans forget homosexuals have sex in each other’s feces; I refer to it as bowel movement sex. From there the next step in marketing became comparing ‘sexual orientation’ to the civil rights movement. If one is born with black skin, they simply cannot wake up one day and declare themselves to be Caucasian and vice-a-versa. God made humans with different color skin, all equal in his eyes as it should be in everyone’s. You can’t simply decide one day to change your race to another race. The militant sexual deviant movement has tried to make that one stick, but thankfully, a large number of Americans, black and white, haven’t drank the poison:

Civil Rights Activist: ‘No Comparison’ Between Civil Rights, Gay Rights Movement

Sodomites claim claim they are born that way and have no choice in their attraction to men instead of a woman. The same for lesbians. They claim just as someone with black or white skin, they have no choice. Really? Thousands of sodomites and lesbians have left their destructive, preferred life styles. Actress Anne Heche used to have sex with Ellen DeGeneres. Ms. Heche then went on to marry a man, have a child. Unfortunately, she divorced, allegedly due to a new relationship, not with a woman, but with a man. So, which way was Ms. Heche born? Another clear example I can give you that it’s a choice and not an “accident” of birth is the candor of WNBA star Sheryl Swoopes. In an interview following her “coming out” in 2005, this was the exchange:

Interviewer: “You have said that you don’t believe you were born gay, which, as you said, may confuse many people. How do you believe you came to be gay?”

SW: “I think there are a lot of people — gays and lesbians — who believe you are born that way. I think there also a lot of people who believe it’s a choice. And, for me, I believe it was a choice. I was at a point in my life where I had gone through a divorce and was not in a relationship, and the choice I made happened to be that I fell in love with another woman. It might confuse some people, and some people may not understand that, but I think in life, no matter what it is that you’re doing, you always have a choice and you make that choice and you have to live with that choice. And it just happened that, you know, my partner and I were really, really good friends, and the more we hung out, the more we did stuff together, my feelings grew stronger and stronger for her, and it got to a point to where I said, “I can’t fight this any more.”

Ms. Swoopes made the choice of embracing sin because she wanted to, not because she was born that way. But, wait! Ms. Swoopes has been engaged to a man since 2011. So, I guess she’s not “gay” anymore.

Ignorant, useful fools in NYC just elected a died in the wool Marxist for their next mayor, Bill De Blasio. His wife, Chirlane McCray, is a “former” lesbian. Angelina Jolie used to have sex with a female; now she’s engaged to Brad Pitt. Amber Heard has sex with men and women; her current partner is Johnny Depp. Makes your head spin.

Lawrence v Texas (2003) went all the way to the un-Supreme Court and is worth mentioning here:

“In her opinion, Justice O’Connor did not deny that homosexuality is a voluntarily chosen “lifestyle” –a startling admission. In his highly acclaimed work, “How to Dethrone the Imperial Judiciary,” legal scholar and constitutional attorney, Dr. Edwin Vieira sums up the Lawrence decision:

“Rather the majority opinion in Lawrence “effectively decrees the end of all legislation” based on morals of any kind. For if morality cannot be invoked as a legitimate basis for legislation in a sexual-morality case, how can it be invoked in any other? Surely the particular area of conduct to which We the People address their moral judgments cannot determine the constitutional outcome.

“Thus, perforce of Lawrence, in the future to constitute “due process of law” as a basis for limiting “liberty,” all legislation must be amoral – that is, all legislation must demonstrably serve some goal other than a concededly moral one. A “wall of separation” between morality and state must be thrown up and maintained.

“Therefore, the Lawrence majority’s repudiation of the history of Western civilization and Christian moral and ethical standards amounted to repudiation of the Declaration of Independence and consequently the Constitution, and consequently again, the justices’ own authority – further proof that whom the gods would destroy they first make mad.”

“In the Lawrence decision, the Supreme Court not only came up with one of the most convoluted, toxic decisions of the past century, it went much deeper than that. This was an all out attack on states’ rights. This decision was so putrid, it should have caused a massive uproar from every Christian, minister, pastor and priest in this country and demand for removal of half the U.S. Supreme Court. The silence has been deafening. This decision not only bodes something akin to a death knell for America’s moral foundation, the injection of international law into America’s judicial system has set an unbelievably dangerous precedent.”

Countless lawsuits have been filed over the past decade by Christians who refuse to genuflect at the altar of political correctness. Some cases have been won on religious grounds, others who know the Bible is God’s words and His Commandments haven’t been so lucky:

Supremes asked to halt ‘compelled’ lesbian speech

“The U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to restore religious and speech freedoms in New Mexico, where the state Supreme Court recently ruled that abandoning one’s freedom is just the “price of citizenship.” The dispute centers on the refusal by Elaine Huguenin, co-owner with her husband, Jonathan, of Elane Photography, to memorialize a same-sex ceremony planned by Vanessa Willock. Willock, who found another photographer for the event, filed a complaint with the state under its anti-discrimination law. The state Supreme Court said the photographer had no right to not be forced to express statements through her work that violated her Christian beliefs.”

The attack on Christianity in this country is reaching the level of fanaticism. Americans are losing their businesses because their religious beliefs are being trampled by thugs on the bench:

‘Bible-Thumping…B**ch’: Bakers Who Refused to Make Gay Couple’s Wedding Cake Shut Down Their Shop Following Threats

“In May, The Blaze told you about Aaron and Melissa Klein, owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa, an Oregon-based bakery that has fallen under intense scrutiny. Throughout 2013, the Christian couple and their business have been in the midst of a media firestorm after refusing to make a wedding cake for a lesbian couple. From threats to vicious phone calls and e-mails, the Klein family has been inundated with angry responses. Now, Aaron and Melissa have announced that they are shutting down their shop.”

Those ‘tolerant’ sexual deviants who demand everyone else give up their religious beliefs so less than 2% of the population can run rough shod over the entire country displayed the usual hate towards anyone who disagrees with their filthy sexual preferences:

“From proclamations that Aaron should be shot to one apparent threat that he be raped, the hate and angst being thrown the Klein family’s way is certainly serious in nature. Some have even wished for the couple’s five children to be stricken with illness. Earlier this summer, Aaron and Melissa shared a number of these e-mails with The Blaze. “You stupid bible-thumping, hypocritical b**ch. I hope your kids get really, really, sick and you go out of business,” read one e-mail. “Here’s hoping you go out of business, you bigot. Enjoy hell,” read another.”

Bigot? Reminds me of this quote: “It’s better to be silent and presumed a fool than to open your mouth and doubt removed altogether.” The List of 7 by Mark Frost

Sexual deviants have always had an agenda. One is to get a foot hold in public schools; they have succeeded with ease. Predators trolling schools across the country for fresh recruits. Since sexual deviants don’t reproduce; their goal is to brainwash your child(ren) into adopting a dangerous lifestyle of filth and sin. A whole lot of those grade school students are now on college campuses continuing the push for deviancy and spreading diseases and AIDS/HIV. Second and of utmost importance:

‘Gays’ admit ENDA game: Outlaw Christian morality – The religious liberty death spiral continues.

“One of the most dangerous and discriminatory pieces of legislation in modern times – the ironically tagged “Employment Non-Discrimination Act,” or ENDA – passed the U.S. Senate on Thursday by a vote of 64-32. Ten Republicans disgracefully joined liberal Democrats in this effort to ultimately outlaw the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic.

“According to its leftist proponents, ENDA would merely insulate people who choose to engage in homosexual conduct (sexual orientation) or those who suffer from gender confusion (gender identity) against employment intolerance. In truth, however, this legislation effectively would codify the very thing it purports to combat: workplace discrimination.

“Writing in the Huffington Post, popular homosexual radio personality Michelangelo Signorile confessed that, of any potential ENDA legislation that might reach President Obama’s desk for his pledged signature, “none should include any religious exemptions” whatsoever.

“If Signorile and other “LGBT” activists get their way, this would mean that churches, mosques, synagogues, religious schools, Bible bookstores, as well as any and every other business in America with 15 or more employees, would be forced, under penalty of law, to abandon the biblical and traditional-values viewpoint on human sexuality, and hire (and otherwise not offend) those who openly flaunt expressly sinful and demonstrably self-destructive sexual behaviors.”

Communism can only survive in a God-less country where the ‘state’ becomes the parents and total authority over what you can and cannot say, think or feel. The push to Sovietize these united States of America is all but a fait accompli. Normalizing and legalizing sexual deviancy has always been a top goal:

The revolution of the family: the Marxist roots of ‘homosexualism’ (Do take the time to read the full column)

“I have been asked recently “what is homosexualism?” I started using the term in my writing on these issues a few years ago when it became clear that we were dealing not with a group of people, but with a particular ideology that is often held by people who are not themselves homosexuals.

“A few days ago in The Guardian, Peter Tatchell wrote a pretty good description not only of that ideology’s goals but its origins. This political ideology, often called “queer theory” by its proponents in academia, is what is being pushed, quite openly these days, by the “gay rights” movement. Despite what we are told all day by their collaborators in the mainstream media, from the six o’clock news to your favourite sit-com, this movement is not about “equal rights”. It is about re-writing the foundational concepts of our entire society. I predict that it will not be much longer before the pretense of “equality” is dropped, having done its work.

“Many people are scratching their heads and asking how we have suddenly found ourselves at the point where two men can be “married,” a woman can be called a “husband” and a man, a “wife,” and children are reduced to political bargaining chips in the adoption wars, when it seems just yesterday we were only talking about equal rights. Since when do “equal rights” mean deconstructing, dismantling, these foundational social concepts?

“If we read them closely, however, the activists themselves have begun to explain it in quite straightforward terms. For them, it has never been about “equal rights” but about the re-writing of our entire social order. The “gay rights” movement has always been, in Peter Tatchell’s own words, “revolutionary, not reformist.”

“Others have pointed out the Marxist origins of the Sexual Revolution as a whole, and it is clear that the sudden explosion of homosexualism is merely the next logical step in a systematic programme. A close cousin to radical feminism and grandchild of Marxism, homosexualism was developed out of the politico-academic pseudo-field of “gender studies” and has, for 30 or 40 years, been pushed on a mostly unwilling public, through “anti-discrimination” and “equalities” legislation by a coalition of lobbyists, NGOs and politicians on the extreme left, and in increasingly powerful international circles.”

The one issue sexual deviants stay away from is science because it’s the fatal blow to the big lie of born that way.

Decades ago, Simon LeVey, a homosexual and author of Queer Science, attempted to use science to prove sexual deviants are born that way. LeVey’s science has been highly criticized over the years, yet sexual deviates held up LeVey as the scientific genius proving “born that way.” However, many forgot LeVey’s own words on that: “It’s important to stress what I didn’t find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn’t show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work.”

Please take the time to read the two articles below because it IS the issue that must become a legal one:

Identical twin studies prove homosexuality is not genetic

“Eight major studies of identical twins in Australia, the U.S., and Scandinavia during the last two decades all arrive at the same conclusion: gays were not born that way….

“Because identical twins are always genetically identical, homosexuality cannot be genetically dictated. “No-one is born gay,” he notes. “The predominant things that create homosexuality in one identical twin and not in the other have to be post-birth factors.” Dr. Whitehead believes same-sex attraction (SSA) is caused by “non-shared factors,” things happening to one twin but not the other, or a personal response to an event by one of the twins and not the other.

“For example, one twin might have exposure to pornography or sexual abuse, but not the other. One twin may interpret and respond to their family or classroom environment differently than the other. “These individual and idiosyncratic responses to random events and to common environmental factors predominate,” he says.”

This is the Way God Made Me”- A Scientific Examination of Homosexuality and the “Gay Gene

“Consider the obvious problem of survival for individuals who allegedly possess a gay gene: individuals who have partners of the same sex are biologically unable to reproduce (without resorting to artificial means). Therefore, if an alleged “gay gene” did exist, the homosexual population eventually would disappear altogether. We now know that it is not scientifically accurate to refer to a “gay gene” as the causative agent in homosexuality. The available evidence clearly establishes that no such gene has been identified. Additionally, evidence exists which documents that homosexuals can change their sexual orientation. Future decisions regarding policies about, and/or treatment of, homosexuals should reflect this knowledge.”

But, of course, it’s exactly those scientific findings sexual deviants don’t want in the court room. There goes the bogus “civil rights” argument as well as the “I was born that way” falsehood – the main staples of the sexual deviant crowd in selling their toxic sexual behavior to children, parents, lawmakers and the courts. Strip away the “born that way” by science and there goes the sympathy factor. It also pins judges to science instead of religion.

Sexual deviants and their supporters always resort to name calling (homophobic or worse) in response to opposition to their preferred, dangerous sexual preferences. Bring up the issue of science and they go ballistic. This isn’t about not liking a sodomite or lesbian. I have met several over the years who seem to be really nice people. I don’t (and never have) called them ugly names like faggot. I do pity them because God has called what they do an abomination and they risk spending eternity in hell. This isn’t about being nice, it’s about science. It’s also about saving lives.

HIV/AIDS is preventable and so are the dozens and dozens of ‘lavender’ diseases which plague sodomites: Medical Consequences of What Homosexuals Do. Horrific, and yet, sodomites continue spreading those horrible medical problems and diseases. Sodomy should be declared a national health issue and condemned, not celebrated. Instead the U.S. government and Department of Defense are the biggest promoters in the world of HIV/AIDS and all the diseases spread by sexual deviants.

If I were a business owner like the two cited at the top of this column or any other individual or entity charged with discrimination, I wouldn’t just put all my eggs in the religion basket (although it is absolutely the right of those folks to protect their religious beliefs), I would also make the case in court that sexual deviants are not born that way. How can you discriminate against someone for a behavior they choose to engage in?

Should priests, pastors or even a judge of the peace be forced to “marry” individuals who claim they were born to have sex with dogs or horses or children or other deviant acts? Where will it end? Just say, I’m born that way and all is excused? I think not. It’s time to put science at the top of the legal battle and expose the truth.

I have included another appendix of items you might have missed. Click here.

There is help for sexual deviants who sincerely wish to turn their lives around:

1 – Homosexuals Anonymous
2 – P-FOX (Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays) also offer resources and support.
3 – The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality

[Just a short note about 9/11. The cost of America’s undeclared “war” (invasion) in Afghanistan has now reached $1 trillion borrowed dollars – massive debt heaped on us all based on what happened on 9/11. Regular readers of my column know I continue to press for the truth about the events of 9/11. Military grade nanothermite is not a conspiracy theory. It was found and tested from the rubble at the twin towers. A new, powerful film has been released: The Anatomy of a Great Deception. For full disclosure I receive no compensation, but I want you to get a copy (or a few) and share it with others or give a copy as a present. I’ve purchased half a dozen copies and given them to individuals I believe seek the truth. It’s very powerful simply because it’s one ‘ordinary’ man’s story who ask a simple question that led him to a not so simple journey. There is factual information in this film that many have never heard about but everyone should. Just a suggestion, order more than one and give one to a friend.]