Connect with us

Conservatism

Love and terrorism, God and flag, guns and gays

Bryan Fischer

Published

on

Love is NOT the response to terrorism

Loretta Lynch, our nation’s attorney general, said yesterday that the ‘most effective’ response to Islamic terrorism ‘is love.’ Yeah, that’ll work. God help us, these are the people who are supposed to keep us safe.

No, Ms. Lynch, the most effective response to Islamic terrorism is killing the bad guys. Killing them over there, keeping them over there instead of letting them in here, and stopping them cold if they do.

Love figures into the equation, it is true, but not in the way Ms. Lynch thinks. Love is what motivates us to use lethal force, if necessary, to stop the enemy over there and here. Love for our country, love for our fellow citizens, and love for our families. Love, as the Bible says, always protects, and sometimes that requires a gun.

Military commits assault to keep man from saying “God”

The military has violated the Constitution and sacred tradition by manhandling a retired airman who dared to mention God.

Oscar Rodriguez, a 33-year Air Force veteran, was invited to deliver the traditional God-honoring speech the military has used for ages in connection with the solemn flag-folding ceremony. Rodriguez was there as the guest of Sgt. Charles Roberson, who was retiring and wanted him to deliver the speech, a speech Rodriguez has delivered more than 100 times.

In 2005, the Pentagon stripped the traditional speech of its references to the God the Founding Fathers worshiped, but many members of the military still value it and request it.

But rather than allow Rodriguez to give the speech, which ends with “God bless our flag. God bless our troops. God bless America,” members of the military in combat fatigues physically assaulted Rodriguez and manhandled him out of the room.

Mind you, each of these airmen who committed this assault and battery on Rodriguez only got into the military in the first place by taking an oath that ends with “So help me, God.” It looks like everybody at Travis Air Force Base needs a refresher course on the faith of the Founders, the Constitution, and their own oath of service.

We have an attorney general who thinks we can defeat our mortal enemies with love and a military who thinks we can do it without God. May God help us, because our nation’s leaders certainly won’t.

Gays and guns

I will defend every constitutional right that homosexuals possess, including the right to keep and bear arms. In the wake of the Orlando massacre, LGBTers have been buying guns in bunches, now fully aware of the lethal danger orthodox Islam represents to their very lives.

As Christians, we are flatly opposed to the cold-blooded murder of anyone, regardless of his sexual preference. The purpose of the Second Amendment is to allow American citizens to defend themselves from physical harm, and homosexuals possess that right just like everyone else.

But while I support every constitutional right homosexuals possess, I oppose the granting of unconstitutional special rights that are predicated on sexually abnormal behavior. There is no constitutional right, for instance, for one homosexual to marry another. You can read the Constitution front to back, left to right, right to left, and in Sanskrit and you will not find one single, solitary word that grants to the federal government (including the judiciary) any legitimate authority to dictate marriage policy to the states.

Homosexuals have always had full marriage equality. That is, they have always been able to marry one adult, non-relative member of the opposite sex exactly like everybody else. That was the rule, and it applied equally to everybody. The same rule for everyone is the very essence of full equality under the law.

Homosexuals had equal rights, but it wasn’t enough for them. They wanted special rights, rights that don’t belong to people who want to marry their daughters, their sisters, their mothers, other people’s children, or animals.

Lest you think this is a merely theoretical issue, Canada has just legalized non-penetrative bestiality and there is move afoot in Sweden to legalize both incest and sex with dead bodies. This is simply further illustration of a truth we have declared from the beginning of the debate over special rights for homosexuals: once you cross the threshold that marriage is the union of one man and one woman and that sex is reserved for marriage, there is no place to stop except at the bottom of an abyss. And that’s where we’re headed.

Bryan Fischer is a senior columnist for Cowger Nation, and the radio host of Focal Point, where he provides expertise on a wide range of public policy topics.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
2 Comments

2 Comments

  1. Peebles coupons

    May 10, 2017 10:45 pm at 10:45 pm

    I am always searching online for posts that can help me. Thx!

  2. wedding event organizers

    February 12, 2018 4:32 am at 4:32 am

    437330 771994Surely,Chilly location! We stumbled on the cover and Im your personal representative. limewire limewire 913410

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Conservatism

U.S. conservatives cancel invitation for Milo Yiannopoulos

Reuters

Published

on

By

Image © Getty

A leading U.S. conservative conference rescinded its invitation to provocative commentator Milo Yiannopoulos and a publisher canceled his book deal on Monday after old internet videos of him recirculated in which he discusses pedophilia.

Yiannopoulos, in a Facebook video post, denied he ever condoned pedophilia and said one video of him was edited to give a misleading impression.

Yiannopoulos, a Briton who is celebrated by some arch conservatives, was banned from Twitter last year after making highly controversial statements. He has infuriated liberals with provocative comments on race, religion and sex and appears to delight in his ability to offend.

The chairman of the American Conservative Union, which sponsors the annual Conservative Political Action Conference, or CPAC, said on Sunday the group rescinded an invitation to this year’s Wednesday-Saturday event “due to the revelation of an offensive video in the past 24 hours condoning pedophilia.”

“We realize that Mr. Yiannopoulos has responded on Facebook, but it is insufficient,” Matt Schlapp, chairman of the union, said in the Twitter post.

CPAC is a high-profile annual gathering of conservative activists. President Donald Trump is among the scheduled speakers this year along with Vice President Mike Pence, White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and senior Trump adviser Stephen Bannon. Yiannopoulos is also an editor for the right-wing Breitbart News, which Bannon once headed.

Earlier this month, the University of California canceled Yiannopoulos’ speaking engagement on the Berkeley campus when violent protests against his appearance broke out.

Trump, in response, threatened on Twitter to cut off federal funding for the university.

The latest controversy stems from a video in which Yiannopoulos seems to suggest the standard for pedophilia is whether the younger partner has gone through puberty.

At another point in the video, however, Yiannopoulos says the established age of consent, which is 16 to 18 years old in the United States, is “about right.”

In his Facebook statement on Monday, Yiannopoulos denied condoning pedophilia.

“I find those crimes to be absolutely disgusting. I find those people to be disgusting,” he said, while expressing regret he used the word “boys” instead of young men while discussing the benefits of relationships between men with large age differences.

Continue Reading

Conservatism

CPAC is now PPAC: Pedophilia-Promoting Action Conference

Bryan Fischer

Published

on

Image © Getty

CPAC, which stands for the “Conservative Political Action Conference,” used to be a venerable conclave which met annually to keep the torch of conservatism lit and burning brightly.

Now it has morphed into an event in which its keynote speaker supports and defends pedophilia (sex with prepubescent boys), pederasty (sex with post-pubescent boys), and statutory rape (adults, such as teachers, having sex with underage individuals).

Over the weekend, this year’s organizers sprung Milo Yiannopoulos, the flamboyantly gay senior editor of Breitbart, on the world as this year’s featured guest. This apparently came as a surprise to the American Conservative Union, the umbrella organization for CPAC.

Yiannopoulos will get more speaking time than either the vice-president of the United States, Mike Pence, or former presidential candidate, Sen. Ted Cruz.

In a tape that surfaced on Sunday, Yiannopoulos can be heard celebrating the wonders of man-boy love.

“We get hung up on this sort of child abuse stuff to the point where we are heavily policing consensual adults.

“In the homosexual world, particularly, some of those relationships between younger boys and older men — the sort of ‘coming of age’ relationship — those relationships in which those older men help those young boys discover who they are and give them security and safety and provide them with love and a reliable, sort of rock, where they can’t speak to their parents.” (Emphasis mine.)

In a 2015 interview with comedian Joe Rogan, Yiannopoulos discussed his sexual relationship with a Catholic priest, one “Father Michael,” which began at age 14.  Yiannopoulos claims to be grateful to this priest for his sexual awakening, even though it is nothing less than pederasty and statutory rape.

Father Michael apparently introduced the young Milo to homosexualty at that tender young age, a reminder that many adult homosexuals were the victims of sexual predators as young boys. Initial male-on-male sexual experiences have an overwhelmingly powerful imprinting effect on the psyche and self-concept of young boys, and many think of themselves as homosexuals from that day forward even though they are not. They are not homosexuals, they are victims.

Homosexuals, as even Milo himself admits, are not born – they are made. He refers to the “born-that-way” narrative as a “myth” invented by homosexual activists in the 1980s to excuse homosexual behavior, and claims that homosexuality is a result of “nurture” rather than “nature.”

Later in the interview with Rogan, Yiannopoulos speaks approvingly of a Hollywood party he attended some time ago in which there were “very young boys” in attendance for sexual purposes.

He also has criticized the fact that we punish teachers who seduce their students, which is the crime of statutory rape. He believes that pederasty – a man having sex with a teenage boy – should not be a crime but something an enlightened society should celebrate.

Whatever else it is, homosexuality is not a “conservative” value. And a proponent of “the crime against nature” has no place at a conservative conference, let alone as the main attraction.

CPAC continues its headlong slide into the abyss of sexually abnormal behavior. After finally allowing the Log Cabin Republicans (a pro-homosexual GOP group) booth space several years ago, CPAC then caved to the gay lobby by allowing the LCR to be a full-fledged sponsor in 2016. And now as the capstone to its dalliance with sexual deviancy, CPAC is giving us Milo.

Even liberals are aghast at what CPAC has done. Jake Tapper of CNN is “horrified,” and wants to know, “how on earth can CPAC defend this?” He adds, ”Preying on children is the definition of evil. Justifying it in any way is sick and disturbing. Has everyone lost their minds?”

The board of the ACU, which apparently was not consulted on the Milo decision, has some serious and immediate thinking and deciding to do, since the conference starts on Wednesday. Breitbart also has some serious thinking to do, since they have made this morally debauched man an international star and the face of their organization. For the sake of sanity, decency, and the conservative movement, here’s hoping and praying that CPAC and Breitbart choose wisely. And here’s hoping and praying that Milo himself can find the path to sexual normalcy before it’s too late.

Continue Reading

Conservatism

The myth of the gay conservative

Bryan Fischer

Published

on

A new and quite insidious trend has been launched in some conservative circles, a trend that unless it is stopped will eat away at the foundation of conservatism like a cancer until the foundation rots away and the whole thing collapses.

This trend is the notion that one can be a practicing homosexual and a conservative at the same time. It’s impossible. Now it is certainly possible for a homosexual to hold conservative views on certain issues, and even defend them on talk shows, but it is not possible for him to be a conservative.

He, for instance, might be able to articulate a conservative view on national defense, or Second Amendment rights, or school choice, or repealing and replacing ObamaCare. But he cannot be a conservative.

Why? Because at the center of conservatism is a non-negotiable view of human sexuality and the family. At the heart of a conservative view of the world lies the family. Not the individual, mind you, but the family. At the heart and soul of conservatism is the notion that marriage consists of one man and one woman and a family consists of a married father and mother and the children they conceive together through their love for each other.

The first command God gave to the very first human beings he created was to start a family: “Be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 1:28). God created one man and one woman at the dawn of time and designed them to be sexually complementary and productive in a way that is impossible for two men or two women.

In conservatism, the family is the cornerstone of civilized society. All the networks in a society – church, politics, business, education, law enforcement – are ultimately intended to serve the purposes and functions of the family. Churches are to nurture the spiritual lives of families, including challenging husbands and fathers to love their wives and their children as an expression of their love for God.

Lawmakers are to protect the family and parental rights and to craft policies, including tax policies, that are friendly to family formation and not hostile to it. They are to support parental choice in education, so parents can place the children they love in an optimal learning environment. Educational systems are there to serve parents, not the other way round.

Businesses are to provide meaningful work that will enable fathers to provide for their families and will give wives and mothers a range of choices as they create a nurturing environment for their families. Law enforcement and the military which protects our nation are there to keep homes, neighborhoods, and communities safe so that families can peacefully enjoy each other and their neighbors, free from the things that threaten their security and their peace of mind.

A prosperous society is founded upon the family. God created marriage before he created any other human institution. He created the family even before he created the church, and certainly before he created government. The natural family – a husband, a wife, and the children they raise – is the bedrock of civilization. No one can be a conservative whose worldview does not place the family and the interests of the family at the center of his worldview.

Thus, there is no room in conservatism for the embrace of a lifestyle in which it is impossible for children to be conceived and brought into the world. There is no room in conservatism for the acceptance of sexual behavior which deviates so radically and dangerously from God’s design for intimacy. There is no room in conservatism for the embrace of a lifestyle which as a matter of course compromises human health through sexually transmitted diseases such as HIV/AIDS. To put it bluntly, sexual behavior that leads to anal cancer may represent a libertarian value but it cannot possibly represent a conservative one.

If homosexuality is allowed an affirmed place in the conservative movement, it may seem harmless at first. But eventually, tolerated rather than excised, its cancerous cells will begin to quietly and yet inexorably multiply and metastasize until it has fatally weakened its host.

Should we love homosexuals? Absolutely. We should love them enough to tell them the truth about where their lifestyle leads, both in this life and the next. Should we make homosexuality any part of the conservative movement? Absolutely not.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Most Popular