The mind-numbingly bad “gender pay-equity” myth

How many 2014 Democratic incumbents have gender pay-equity gaps? – Anyone promoting the “77 cents” argument should be ignored for at least one election cycle, because it means they are either wildly ignorant and/or malicious liars.  Republicans should fight back against this as Cruz is doing.

Cruz: “Under President Obama, 3.7 million women have moved into poverty.”

Earlier today, Glenn Kessler predicted that Democrats would find the 77-cent lie too irresistible to jettison. Perhaps a dose of their own medicine might cure them.

. . .

It turns out President Obama isn’t the only hypocritical Democrat, in fact Senate Democrats have their own problems when it comes to equal pay.  We pulled the official payroll records of various offices and calculated the average pay for men and women in each office for the most recent 6 month period available. Since some employees only worked a portion of the six month period, we calculated how much each person was paid per day in order to give an accurate representation.  Here’s what we found:

  • Mark Udall pays women 91 cents for every dollar that a man makes.
  • Mary Landrieu pays women 88 cents for every dollar that a man makes.
  • Mark Begich pays women 82 cents for every dollar that a man makes.
  • Mark Warner pays women 75 cents for every dollar that a man makes.
  • Gary Peters pays women 67 cents for every dollar that a man makes.

That means on average, these five Democrats on the ballot in battleground states pay women in their office 79 cents for every dollar made by a male employee.  All Republicans support equal pay for equal work, regardless of gender or race for working families, mothers, fathers, sisters, and brothers. Democrats, on the other hand, don’t practice what they preach.  They’re hypocrites.

Assuming this is accurate, only Landrieu and Udall even make it to the White House’s level of failure on the issue [see update below]. Warner (D-VA) pays less than the 77-cent bogus metric derided by the White House (using their same calculation), while House Democrat Gary Peters — who has declared his candidacy for the retiring Carl Levin’s Senate seat — falls a full ten cents below the national average.

The answer to this is, just as it is in the rest of the country, that men and women have different priorities and desires in the marketplace.

 

 

The IRS scandal isn’t going away

It is stunning how deep this is, and how Elijah Cummings (D) tried but thankfully failed to get this investigation stopped (turns out he is a part of the problem!).  Via Timeline of Targeting: The Evidence Mounts Against the IRS’s Lois Lerner.

Today, the House Ways and Means Committee voted to recommend criminal charges against Lois Lerner.

The Committee’s letter to the Justice Department documents in detail the nefarious character of Lois Lerner’s actions.

The Committee pointed to three specific violations of federal law:

“Lerner used her position to improperly influence agency action against only conservative organizations, denying these groups due process and equal protection rights under the law.  She showed extreme bias and prejudice towards conservative groups.  The letter lays out evidence on how Lerner targeted conservative organization Crossroads GPS as well as other right-leaning groups, while turning a blind eye to similarly-organized liberal groups, like Priorities USA.

“Lerner impeded official investigations by providing misleading statements in response to questions from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA).

“Lerner risked exposing, and may actually have disclosed, confidential taxpayer information, in apparent violation of Internal Revenue Code section 6103 by using her personal email to conduct official business.”

The letter makes it blatantly clear how Lerner, influenced by pressure from the Left, cultivated a culture of bias and engaged in reprehensible behavior, violating the free speech rights of thousands of Americans.

Most stunning is her open political bias.  Not only does she clearly show animus toward conservative leaning groups, but when President Obama’s own campaign-committee-turned-advocacy-group, Organizing for America (OFA), applied for tax-exempt status, she remarked to one of her employees responsible for reviewing such applications, “Oh—maybe I can get the DC office job!”

If that doesn’t belie her true intentions, what does?  Angling for a job at OFA, using the power of the office for political gain, and putting the full weight of the most dangerously abusive federal agency on the neck of political enemies, but according to President Obama, there isn’t a “smidgen of corruption.”

The evidence to the contrary is mounting.

The House Ways and Means Committee has put together an detailed and damaging timeline of the IRS’s targeting of conservatives.

The timeline that follows is very detailed.  What adds to the insult is how Obama tries to pretend there isn’t even a “smidgen” of corruption and the media lets him off the hook.  Even Democrats should realize the problems of letting an organization like the IRS operate like this.

Schizophrenic feminism

One of the most bizarre things about radical feminism is how quickly they will abandon their supposed core ideals to support unrestricted and even taxpayer-funded abortion.

Exhibit A: Bill Clinton. The guy was everything they should hate about men, with one exception. He supported abortion, so they loved him.

Exhibit B: “Bro-choice” guys.  The real reasons lots of young males support abortion rights is to get sex without apparent consequences.  In other words, to use women.  The early feminists knew this. You should know it, too. And keep this in mind when pro-abortion people insist that men should have no say in abortion. Have you noticed that they don’t try to shut up the men who support abortion?

Exhibit C: While claiming that women are strong and wise enough to know when to kill their children they gladly accept support from pro-abortion guys saying how stupid women are.

Exhibit D: Planned Parenthood systematically hides rape, incest and sex trafficking.  They have been caught on audio and video countless times.  I mock the pro-aborts who think these aren’t real.  Do you seriously think that Planned Parenthood wouldn’t have immediately sued to shut this down if that were the case?  When Lila Rose exposed them on video it made the news for 5 minutes until they let PP pretend that those were just a few “rogue” employees.  But the cross-country evidence is there for anyone who isn’t blinded by the pro-abortion media.

Exhibit E: Planned Parenthood would rather destroy a breast cancer charity than part ways amicably.

Exhibit F: They know that Kermit Gosnell was not unique and that there are many abortionists like him, but they do nothing to try to stop them.  In fact, they aggressively fight regulations that would make abortions safer for the mothers (though, of course, they are still deadly to the children).

Exhibit G: They know that nearly all gender-selection abortions kill females for the sole reason that they are female.  In addition to killing the females, it creates many additional societal problems such as sex trafficking.  Yet pro-aborts do nothing to stop it, because fighting that would point to the humanity of the unborn, and pro-aborts avoid that at all costs.

Exhibit H: While pretending to be for the choices of all women, they viciously attack pro-life women.

Exhibit I: They discount women who regret their abortions and try to keep them from seeking the hope and healing available to them in Jesus.

Abortion is pure misogyny.

———

This is what control looks like.

This  is what hate looks like.

This  is what extremism looks like.

This  is what — as even some pro-aborts concede — murder looks like.

Pro-abortion extremists have such seared consciences that they can’t even look at what they are responsible for.

Good pro-life news

The abortion industry tries to discredit Abby Johnson for leaving Planned Parenthood after she saw an abortion, but it seems to keep backfiring on them.

Via Planned Parenthood guard told to watch pro-lifers, but instead he asks them to help him leave job:

A Planned Parenthood security guard tasked with spying on Abby Johnson’s pro-life charity And Then There Were None – dedicated to helping abortion workers escape the industry – was so impressed with what he saw that he asked the group to help him leave as well.

Johnson, a former Planned Parenthood facility director herself, says this isn’t the first time Planned Parenthood’s attempts to foil her organization have backfired.

“We’ve told you before about the many times workers have contacted us because Planned Parenthood has attempted to ‘warn’ their employees about And Then There Were None. They didn’t even know about our ministry until they got the email from Planned Parenthood!” Johnson wrote in an e-mail to supporters. “That prompted several workers to contact us … and eventually leave their job in the industry.”

In the case of the Planned Parenthood security guard, “Planned Parenthood gave this employee a task. His job was to keep tabs on me and our organization,” Johnson said. “He was so intrigued by what he saw, and so miserable in his job, he contacted us. We are now working to place him in another position! So, all we can say is, thank you for the referral, Planned Parenthood!”

That is so great that she helps people leave those soul-shattering jobs.

These are your tax dollars at work funding the spying, of course.

Gender-selection abortion bans: Good for the cause of life and good politics

Nearly all gender-selection abortions kill females for the sole reason that they are female.  It is the ultimate misogyny.  Of course, all abortions (except those that save the life of the mother) are immoral, but any time we can limit any abortions that is a victory.

Via South Dakota lawmakers ban abortion for gender selection.

The South Dakota Legislature has given final approval to a bill that bans abortions sought because of a fetus’s gender.

. . .

The bill would make abortions sought because of a fetus’s gender illegal. The measure would make it a Class 6 felony, carrying a maximum penalty of two years in prison and a $4,000 fine, for a doctor to knowingly perform or attempt an abortion sought because of a fetus’s gender.

Supporters say a pregnancy should not be terminated because parents don’t like the gender of a fetus.

But opponents say the measure is unconstitutional.

Live Action and Lila Rose have done a great job of exposing how gender-selection abortions are done not just in China and India but in the U.S., all with the blessing and support of “feminists.”

Even if this is overturned because of faux Constitutionality reasons, this is still great politics.  It highlights that abortion kills real human beings, and how some are deemed worthy of life and others are not.  And it especially exposes the false “war on women” meme when the pro-aborts aggressively fight gender-selection abortion bans.  It is hard to claim you are pro-women when you fight for the right to kill them.

We should put forth similar legislation banning abortions that would kill gays or those with a predisposition to be gay.  Yes, I know they aren’t “born that way,” but there is nothing wrong with using the false arguments of the Left against them.  Interestingly, when I’ve asked Leftists if they would support such a ban they have always chosen abortion over gays.

Passing even selective bans on abortion, such as those against women or gays, is a great opportunity to highlight who really has the best interests those people at heart.

Let’s continue to be as innocent as doves and as wise as serpents when protecting innocent human life.

—–

P.S. Also remember that abortionists like Planned Parenthood hide statutory rape, incest and sex trafficking. Is it good for women if you hide these crimes so you can make money off abortions?

Amnesty for illegal aliens: A terrible idea for everyone except Democratic leaders

It is suicide for the Republican party and for our country.  We have everything to lose and nothing to gain.

Via Amnesty as Suicide:

Immigrants tend to vote Democratic not because they’re withdrawing their support from Republicans until the GOP works with Democrats on immigration reform, but because they benefit from generous social programs, she added.

“They’re not for amnesty,” she said. “They’re for the goody handouts of Democratic party… [A]mnesty is suicide for the conservative movement and the Republican party.”

Opening the Third World floodgates Teddy Kennedy maliciously unlocked with his 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act would exacerbate every problem we face, including but not limited to crime, urban blight, unsafe highways, high unemployment, unsustainable entitlement spending, cultural balkanization, a deteriorating work ethic, and the decay of our government into a banana republic.

This is a price people like Obama are willing to pay for obvious reasons. They prefer the Third World ideologically, and find a wretchedly impoverished, government-dependent population with no cultural commitment to constitutional principles easier to rule.

Why Republicans go along with this treason is a mystery, even in the short term. Not only will the Third Worlders vote overwhelmingly Democrat, but the conservative base will stay home in disgust.

 

An atheist found one absolute moral law. Guess which politically correct one it is?

Atheists often have in-house debates over morality.  Some try to pretend that there really could be objective morality under atheism (e.g., Christopher Hitchens, for all his poor reasoning, was anti-abortion).  Others are more consistent with their worldview — well, they try to be until someone does something bad to them — and insist that there are no universal morals.  They are pure moral relativists, acknowledging that we’ve (allegedly) evolved to “think” there are morals, but that these are really just personal preferences.

One of the latter group has had a change of heart.  Sort of.  Via Professor Larry Moran squares the circle:

Professor Larry Moran has recently created something which he has previously declared to be impossible: a moral absolute. Readers might be wondering: what is Professor Moran’s moral absolute all about? Is it about the inherent wrongfulness of killing the innocent, or taking away people’s freedom, or oppressing the poor, or violating a commitment one has given? Wrong, wrong, wrong and wrong! Here’s Professor Moran’s new moral absolute, in all its resplendent glory:

“It is totally wrong, all the time, to discriminate against someone based on their sexual preferences… There is NEVER a time when an enlightened society should tolerate, let alone legalize, bigotry.”

The reason why I was surprised to read this statement on Professor Moran’s blog is that he has previously denied the existence of moral absolutes. Here are a few examples of statements he has made on the subject of morality, and on how we can know that something is true . . .

How fitting that he picked our society’s most politically protected sins to declare off-limits for criticism! He is a Romans 1 poster boy. He suppresses the truth in unrighteousness by denying that God exists, then “gives approval to those who practice” exhibit A in God’s list of sins that suppression of truth leads to.

Romans 1:18–20 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

Romans 1:26-28 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.

You can’t make up things like this.  2,000 years ago the Holy Spirit inspired Romans 1, and here it perfectly describes this atheist.  He suppresses the truth by saying there is no God and no moral laws, then he makes up one moral law that goes against God’s first example of where suppression of the truth leads.

Atheists simply can’t live consistently with their worldview.  I hope God makes Moran and others spiritually alive so they can repent and believe.  There is a better way to live than by using the talents God gave you to shake your fist at him 24×7.

Heterosexual supporters of “same-sex marriage” are going to get mugged by reality

Here’s why: Their support for these “marriages” will also justify support for polygamy, polyamory, bi-sexual multiple marriages and more — and their spouses will have the option to participate in those without their consent.  The woman who supports “same-sex marriage” today may regret it when her husband brings home another woman — or another man — to legally share her home and finances.

Please read this post carefully so you’ll be able to show people how the pro-gay movement can have deep and personal impacts on them.  This is not a “slippery slope” fallacy, it is a logical slippery slope (or, as I like to call it, a cliff argument), where the arguments for one position automatically support another position as well.  And don’t say, “That can’t happen!,” because it is already getting mainstreamed.  

The consequences are huge and have already manifested themselves in many places.  Their agenda has and will continue to cost people their personal liberties, religious freedom and parental rights — and those are design features, not bugs.

There is a simple reason that the gay lobby focuses mostly on the “LG” (lesbian and gay) part of the LGBTQX alphabet soup: The reasoning of the rest of the acronym is harder to sell because of the logical consequences.  But if they can get the first part affirmed and codified then it will be too late to backtrack to prevent the rest from taking place.  Case in point: Have you noticed how they never talk about bisexuals and their “civil rights” to be able to marry at least one person of each sex?  After all, all the same arguments for gays and lesbians should apply to them.

We have such obvious and sound arguments on our side.  By nature and design, one man / one woman relationships produce the next generation and only those unions can provide a mother and a father to a child.  Therefore, the government has an interest in those unions, because they form the foundation of society.  We don’t even have to use religious arguments, though of course God’s ideal is one man / one woman marriages and homosexual behavior is a sin.  The Bible could not be more clear.

But our arguments have often been ineffective.  Why?  Because the foundational lie of the gay lobby works so well.  They combine a lie (“Agree with us and it will cost you nothing while helping others”) with the truth (“We will relentlessly harm you if you disagree”) and that is too much for many people to withstand.  They have made it very easy for people to switch sides and repeat false sound bites (they were born that way, Jesus never said anything about it, it prevents bullying, it doesn’t hurt you, they love each other, we shouldn’t ban same-sex marriage, etc.).  People are really good at rationalizing lies to seek pleasure and avoid pain.

So I encourage you to try this reasoning: Ask the other person if they’d mind if their spouse (current or future) decided to maintain their relationship and marry someone else of the opposite sex — or the same sex.  Would that bother them?  If so, why aren’t they living consistently — even just hypothetically! — with their own worldview?  If they claim it wouldn’t bother them, ask if you can use your home polygraph test on them.  The other person may lie to you and pretend that they wouldn’t care, but you will have given them something to think about.  Later in the post I’ll show what that conversation could look like.

The argument takes the pro-gay reasoning to its logical conclusions and shows how most people will not like the possibilities.  That should help them re-think their entire argument.

It starts by demonstrating the truth that marriage is something we describe, not define.  As Greg Koukl at Stand to Reason has noted, marriage has always described something that existed: A union of a man and a woman.  But if people think marriage is something we get to define, then anything goes.  Sure, they pretend that they just want to define it as any two adults who love each other, etc.  But why pull up the drawbridge there?  If you choose to define it rather than describe it, then why can’t others define it their way?

Then it points out the logical conclusions: If marriage isn’t just a union of a man and a woman, then why can’t it involve three people?  Why can’t it be polygamous?  Why can’t a man have a wife and a husband in two separate but simultaneous marriages?  Why can’t you marry your dog?  As Koukl notes, when the other person says those are silly examples, you get to agree with them!  Yes, they are silly — but they are your arguments, not mine.  If your position is that we can define marriage how we like, these possibilities are open for others who are more “open minded” than you are.

Here’s how that conversation might look.  Remember to be nice!  This doesn’t have to be combative.  You aren’t trying to grind them into a fine powder, you want them to see where their worldview is taking them.  Oh, and you want to work the Gospel in wherever you can.

Christian: So what do you think of this “same-sex marriage” and adoptions by gay people?

Pro-gay person: I’m all for it.  Hey, they love each other and that’s what it is all about.  You have a civil right to marry who you like.  It doesn’t hurt me or my marriage.  And the Bible never said it is wrong.

And gay people adopting is fine. Kids need love from anyone.  It doesn’t have to be a male and a female.

C: Actually, the Bible couldn’t be more clear, and even two out of the three types of pro-gay people agree that it considers homosexual behavior sinful.  We can come back to that if you like.

So do you think marriage is something you define or describe?  I mean, is marriage a thing that exists and then we describe it, or is it just a word that we can change the definition of?

P: I think we can redefine it.  It used to be that interracial marriage was forbidden.

C: But the definition was the same: A union of a man and a woman.  So if you can redefine it, I assume you are OK with polygamy, polyamory (group marriage), polyandry (multiple husbands), one or more spouse of each sex, marriages to animals, etc.?

P: Oh, don’t be silly.

C: I agree that those are silly, but they are your arguments, not mine.  If marriage is something you define, then who are you to say others can’t define it their way?  All the same things apply: It is the same love, they were born that way, Jesus never said anything about them, etc.

P: But those things won’t happen.

C: They can and they will.  The polygamy and pedophilia movements are already latching onto the gay agenda gains and using the same reasoning. ABC just ran a fluff piece on polygamy and The Atlantic is advocating for polyamory.  This is how they change the culture to accept what used to be unthinkable.  Who would have predicted 10-15 years ago where we’d be now with “same-sex marriage?”  Who would have thought that Christian bakers could lose their businesses for not baking cakes for same-sex “weddings?”

So why are you pulling up the drawbridge on these other people who want to live out the way they were born?  How do their loving relationships hurt you?  If a bisexual was born that way, how can you deny him the fulfillment of marrying a man and a woman?

And who says that you can only love one person?  Why can’t a man or a woman have two or more spouses of any gender?

Real feminists should hate where this is headed.  Women will devote their youth to raising kids, only to have their husband be able to bring another partner into the household.

P: Well, I guess . . .

C: You are married with kids, right?

P: Yes, I’ve been married to my husband for 12 years and we have 2 kids.

C: OK, so consider this: Your husband comes home and tells you he loves you and wants to stay married to you, but he has always been attracted to men as well.  And there is a man he really loves.  So for him to be complete he is also going to marry him.  His “husband” will live in your house with you and your kids and they will have sex together.    

P: That’s ridiculous.

C: But it could happen, right?  Lots of men have abandoned families for gay lovers and women have left for lesbian relationships.  Episcopalian “Bishop” Gene Robinson is a Leftist hero for leaving his wife and kids for his gay lover.  Why shouldn’t these guys stay married and just add on?

Again, I’m using your born that way / same love / etc. logic.

So what would you do in that situation?

P: But our vows were to “forsake all others.”

C: Uh, sorry, but are you not familiar with no-fault divorce?  Wedding vows used to be like a real contract where you couldn’t unilaterally abandon your obligation.  But with no-fault divorce either party can leave for any reason.  So with the political clout LGBTQ people have things like this are inevitable.

P: Well, my husband would never do that.

C: Probably not, but if he had wanted to he probably wouldn’t have told you until society and your Left-leaning church decided that “same-sex marriage” was a civil right.

Again, what would you do?  It is just a hypothetical based on taking your views to their logical conclusions, so please don’t be offended.

P: Well, I’d divorce him.  Or I’d marry another husband!

C: And what makes you think another guy would want to be involved in that?!  “Yeah, my husband married a guy that shares our bed now, so I want a second husband.”

Wouldn’t you want your husband to be happy and fulfilled and to be who he really is?

P: Not at my expense!

C: Indeed.  So if you divorced him, do you realize that some Leftist judge would probably give him parental rights? 

P: No way!

C: Way.  Think about it: You and society have decided that it is illegal for adoption agencies to “discriminate” against gay couples.  So they are “obviously” just as fit to parent your kids as a heterosexual couple.  And there would be two of them — your husband and his lover — versus just one of you.  And given how politically incorrect it would be to give custody to you, the judge would almost certainly side with them.  

So the logical conclusion of your worldview would be you — or someone else — either living with your spouse and his new spouse (man or woman) and you would have no legal control over it.

P: I still don’t think that would happen.

C: It will, because the logic is already in place once you grant civil rights to sexual preferences — whether allegedly inborn or not.  

Let’s try another example: Regular polygamy.  I picked the “bisexual polygamy” first because, oddly enough, they are ahead of the regular polygamists in getting civil rights for their sexual preferences.  But how can you argue against polygamy at all?  At least those relationships fit the original definition of marriage — that is, one man and one woman.  By nature and design they could produce children and provide a mother and a father to them.  They “just” involved more than one of those relationships.  

P: But polygamy is wrong! [Note: The Leftists may not even think it is wrong, but I assumed so in this case to make it harder to convince them.]

C: We agree, but you’ve already made the case for them: They love each other (“same love!”), they were born that way, etc.  They can even claim that there are more parents around to love the kids.  So your support of government recognition of same-sex unions unwittingly made the case for polygamy.

So here’s another hypothetical: What if your husband decides he’d like a younger wife but doesn’t want the costly divorce?  He’ll be able to marry someone whether you like it or not and bring her into your house.  She would share in all you have built up over the years and actually live with you.  Think of the guys who dump their spouses for “trophy wives.”  Polygamy may be much simpler and cheaper for them.

P: My husband would never do that!

C: But if society tells him it is OK, he might change his mind.  Remember how much people are influenced by the “if it is legal then it must be moral” line of thinking.  Even Planned Parenthood said this about abortion in a 1964 advertisement: “An abortion kills the life of a baby after it has begun.”  Just years later half the population thought that abortion was an inalienable right and a completely moral solution.  So give it a decade or two and it may seem natural for your husband to consider a younger model.

And even though the Bible clearly teaches that God’s ideal is one man / one woman marriages for life, it is a thousand times easier to twist the Bible to support polygamy than it is to support “same-sex marriage.”

And even if your husband wouldn’t do that, what about all the other women and children impacted by it?

Now don’t feel like you have to answer me now, or at all, but I encourage you to think carefully about these things and see if perhaps you should reconsider your views.  If you think I’ve stated something incorrectly or illogically, please let me know.  But I firmly believe that those are all logical consequences of assigning civil rights to sexual preferences. Even if gays were born that way, there are no good reasons for the government to get involved in their relationships and there are many bad things that will inevitably happen — if not to you, then to others.

And please remember what the word of God says about this:

  • 100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior describe it as sin in the clearest and strongest possible terms.
  • 100% of the verses referring to God’s ideal for marriage involve one man and one woman.
  • 100% of the verses referencing parenting involve moms and dads with unique roles (or at least a set of male and female parents guiding the children).
  • 0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to homosexual behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions of any kind.

God created this world and knows exactly how it works.  Living in denial of that reality is always a recipe for pain.  The Good News is that all sins can be forgiven through repenting and trusting in Jesus.

—–

Conclusion: I encourage you to try this reasoning with people who hold pro-LGBTQ views.  I think it is a provocative way to get them to quit spouting fallacious sound bites and to think more carefully about the logical conclusions of their views.  Yes, it is an emotional argument, but one grounded in facts and logic.  The Left falsely uses emotional arguments, but there is nothing wrong with use using them properly.

——

By the way, if you a conservative using this on a Left-leaning spouse, be sure to tell them these are hypothetical situations!  You don’t want them to freak out too badly.

Why is the primary lie of the gay lobby so effective?

Because they combine it with some truth.

First, the lie:

Agree with us and it will cost you nothing while helping others.

What’s not to like?  Well, lots, if you give it a little thought.

It will make you more popular with the world, because you’ll be perceived as loving and tolerant instead of hateful, but it denies the truth in many ways.  Their agenda has and will continue to cost people their personal liberties, religious freedom and parental rights — and those are design features, not bugs.

And it doesn’t even help those it claims to.  Gays have 40+ times higher rates of Syphilis and HIV, partly because 62% of men who know they are HIV-positive have unprotected sex with men. Violence is higher in LGBTQ relationships.  Even gay leaders wouldn’t want gays around their teenage sons, because they know how predatory that culture can be.  People can and do change sexual preferences.  They are not “born that way,” and even if they were it wouldn’t justify the behavior any more than being born lustful, greedy, angry, etc. justifies those sins.

And of course, that lie explicitly denies the word of the one true God.  To teach the opposite is hate, not love. Bible-believing Christians and even two out of the three types of pro-gay people* (religious or not) can see these truths:

  • 100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior describe it as sin in the clearest and strongest possible terms.
  • 100% of the verses referring to God’s ideal for marriage involve one man and one woman.
  • 100% of the verses referencing parenting involve moms and dads with unique roles (or at least a set of male and female parents guiding the children).
  • 0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to homosexual behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions of any kind.

Then why do so many people believe the lie?  Because it is packaged with some true messages.  Satan is evil, but he isn’t stupid.  Jesus rightly called him the father of lies, but that doesn’t mean Satan won’t gladly tell some of the truth to help sell the lies.  People have known for millennia that homosexual behavior was wrong.  God specifically says that you have to suppress the truth in unrighteousness to deny his existence, and one of the ways that rebellion manifests itself in in homosexual behavior.**

See how their truth and lies combination works:

Lie: Agree with us and it will cost you nothing while helping others.

Truth: Disagree with us and we will hurt you.  We will relentlessly mock you in government schools, the media and entertainment.  Like the blind men of Sodom, we will persist no matter what until everyone affirms us.  Not just tolerates, but actively affirms.  Silence will be interpreted as disapproval, and it will cost you your job, business, reputation or even your freedom.  We will not quit until all churches must “marry” same-sex couples and hire actively LGBTQ people.  It will be illegal to quote many parts of the Bible.  It will usher in legalized polygamy, polyamory, pedophilia and more [click any of those links to see how they are already being normalized].  We pretended that we were against those but we never really cared.  We favor anything that rebels against God.  But don’t feel too threatened.  We’ll help you convince others that the Bible doesn’t really say homosexual behavior is a sin, that it doesn’t harm people, etc.

Here’s just one recent example: LGBT Activist Declares: ‘We Need to Start Making Their Lives a Living Hell’

It’s time that the LGBT community forms a new organization that targets homophobes, bigots, religious zealots, religious fanatics, and all other assholes who are against equality, and human and civil rights for all people.
By targeting these bigots, and publishing every little detail of their sex lives, or personal lives, taking pictures through their windows, and getting the pics out on the internet, showing every little thing that they do, including how they wipe their asses when in the bathroom, or for that matter if they’re wiping their asses in the kitchen — we’ve got to catch it on camera.
The time to just sit back and take it, are over with for the LGBT community. We need to get rid of bigots like these homophobic religious assholes, and if it means exposing every little thing about them, then that’s what we need to do.
We need to start making their lives a living hell by constant observation and publishing pics and articles every time they fart, or spit, or even look cross-eyed. It’s obvious these bigots only understand one thing, and that is persecution, discrimination and bigotry.
Here come the LGBT bigots, gonna prey on the religious zealots, fanatics, and bigots who think their shit don’t stink, and think they can control everyone else’s life.
LET’S GET RID OF THESE BASTARDS ONCE AND FOR ALL!!!!

Can’t you just feel the love and tolerance?  That’s just one of the countless things the mainstream media will never tell you.  If they did, do you think it just might change the support for “same-sex marriage?”

That’s their combined message, and that is why so many people conveniently believe the lie.  Don’t give in.  Or if you have given in, come back to the truth and help others do the same.  If you really love God and your neighbor you’ll speak the truth.  In the next post I’ll explain an easy but provocative way to do it.

P.S. Their agenda is propped up by all sorts of other lies as well, such as Matthew Shepard’s murder, tipping hoaxes, birthday party snub hoaxes, etc.

——–

* The three general types of pro-gay theology people:

  1. “The Bible says homosexuality is wrong but it isn’t the word of God.” (Obviously non-Christians)
  2. “The Bible says it is wrong but God changed his mind and is only telling the theological Left.” (Only about 10 things wrong with that.)
  3. “The Bible is the word of God but you are just misunderstanding it” (Uh, no, not really.)

** Romans 1:18–20, 26-28 (ESV) 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. 28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.

This what coveting looks like.

The green bars below are the percent of people in various UK political parties who would increase taxes on the wealthy even if it didn’t yield extra tax money.  That’s coveting, pure and simple.  Guess which political party had 72% who admitted to coveting?  The Labour party, the UK equivalent of the U.S. Democrats.

british-punitive-taxation-support

Think about this carefully: The Left wants to take money from prosperous people even if it doesn’t help others.  That speaks volumes about their worldview and their other policies.  

Via Most British Labour Voters Would Impose Taxes Purely Out of Malice:

Here’s the legend: Con = Conservative Party (Tories); Lab = Labour (equivalent to USA’s Democrat Party); Lib Dem = Liberal Democrat (not as left-wing as Labour); UKIP = UK Independence Party.

The esteemed countermoonbat Daniel Hannan provides some analysis:

Sixty-nine per cent of Labour supporters would want a top rate tax of 50 per cent even if it brought in no money.

That is, they would impose the tax simply to punish people for having created wealth — on moral grounds.

Politicians either know or should know that increasing tax rates doesn’t always increase tax revenues.  Even JFK knew that!  But they appeal to people’s covetous nature and want to “soak the rich,” even though they are usually remarkably waterproof.

Appealing to people’s sinful desires may help people get elected, but it is still evil.

The problem is in the church as well, where Leftist false teachers encourage people to covet.

By the way, Obama is officially on the green bar, having supported the concept of ineffective tax hikes just to support the appearance of “fairness.”

More from the link:

Theft motivated purely by maliciousness is regarded as moral by these freaks.

No doubt they would wrap their malice in rhetoric about reducing income inequality…

. . .

We can encourage by far the most common forms of legal tax avoidance: shorter hours and earlier retirement. All these things will make our country more equal. All of them will make it poorer.

Lately Obama has been demagoguing the income inequality issue like a true Marxist. Appallingly but unsurprisingly, he has revealed that he believes wealth should be confiscated even if it actually reduces government revenue, “for purposes of fairness.”

Q. If Obama likes abortion so much, why won’t he say the word?

A. Because deep down we all know it is murder.

From his recent statement celebrating the Roe v. Wade verdict that has led to the slaughter of 57 million innocent but unwanted human beings.  Count how many times he says the A-word (hint: zero).

Today, as we reflect on the 41st anniversary of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade, we recommit ourselves to the decision’s guiding principle: that every woman should be able to make her own choices about her body and her health.

That commits the most common pro-abortion fallacy, which is ignoring the unwanted human being killed during the procedure.  What about her choices, her body and her health?

We reaffirm our steadfast commitment to protecting a woman’s access to safe, affordable health care and her constitutional right to privacy, including the right to reproductive freedom.

Never let them get away with the Orwellian term reproductive freedom.  It is a scientific fact that a new human being is created at fertilization, so all abortions kill human beings who have already reproduced.  

And we resolve to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies, support maternal and child health, and continue to build safe and healthy communities for all our children.

If you really want safe communities for children you should stop killing them.  Make abortion illegal and you’ll cut down on a few million murders per year.

Because this is a country where everyone deserves the same freedom and opportunities to fulfill their dreams.

 

Everyone?  How about the unborn?  It takes a special kind of evil for him to say that while fulfilling the Democrats’ dream of increased abortions via taxpayer funding and no restrictions.  From their platform:

The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.

Via Obama Celebrates 41 Years of Abortion: Roe an “Opportunity to Fulfill Dreams” | LifeNews.com.

Did your media tell you this about the Sandy Hook shooter?

Or did they just use the story as a tool to take away your 2nd Amendment rights?  If you haven’t heard about this then you need to expand your media horizons.

Via Disturbing: Adam Lanza PC Contained Info on “Rights of Pedophiles, Movie About Man/Boy Love, Instant Messages Concerning Homosexual Fantasies”

Well, this will probably be the last you ever hear about Adam Lanza from the mainstream media.

The state’s attorney report on the horrific murders at  the Sandy Hook Elementary School by shooter Adam Lanza found no “conclusive motive” for his actions but did document unsettling facts about the 20-year-old killer, including computer files he kept on the rights of pedophiles, a movie about man/boy love, instant messages concerning “homosexual fantasies,” numerous mass murder documents, and a computer game entitled “School Shooting.”In “School Shooting,” an amateur computer game, “the player controls a character who enters a school and shoots at students,” reads an Investigation Report (DPS-302-E) that is among the 1,000-plus pages comprising the state’s attorney report on the shootings.

Lanza, after shooting his mother Nancy Lanza at home on the morning of Dec. 14, 2012, drove to the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., and shot and killed 20 children and six adults, and then shot himself.  (Full report, text and images here.  Summary report here.)

Guess we need to ban movies about man/boy love, huh?

Hat tip: The Other McCain

 

The X stands for QQAOPA

After reading this you will only wish that the title referred to some sort of bizarre algebraic equation.

Alternate title: Sometimes I hate being right.

Back around 2005, before I started my own blog, the LGBT (Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender) term was fairly ubiquitous, but I started adding an X to the end of it (LGBTX) when commenting on other sites to emphasize how it was just a matter of time before they added more letters. I just meant it as a placeholder, but what has happened in less than a decade is beyond parody.

Via About – Queer Resource Center – College of Arts and Sciences – Lewis & Clark (your college education dollars at work!):

Beyond providing support and resources, the QRC* seeks to advocate on behalf of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, asexual, omnisexual, pansexual and allied community (LGBTQQAOPA).

Yes, in less than ten years the “X” placeholder exploded to QQAOPA.  Who knows what they’ll add next?

These haters must be discriminating against all the “cis” gender people and more (look it up), because LGBTQQAOPA isn’t inclusive enough.

I submit that they should go ahead and add PPP for Pedophilia, Polygamy and Polyamory, because — as predicted — they are using the same arguments that the gay lobby used (born that way, same love, if-you-disagree-you’re-a-hater, etc.).

And there is the obvious overlap for many of the letters: Famous Gay Rights Activist Now Also Famous for Child Pornography Habits.  Yeah, he was just a famous gay rights leader caught with baby-rape porn, so he only got 6 months in jail and won’t lose his government pension because that crime “obviously” doesn’t violate his moral turpitude agreement.  And of course the mainstream media would never tell you about this case.

They should consolidate their unwieldy term as “R” for rebels.

Romans 1:26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. 28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.

It is fascinating/horrifying to see how faddish sexual perversions have become.  It isn’t cool enough just to claim to be gay, lesbian or even bisexual.  People seem to want to have their own individual identity.  I pray that they discover that God’s way is the best way.  Always.

And I pray that those claiming the name of Christ will have the courage to speak the truth on these topics instead of suppressing the truth in unrighteousness.  

*QRC = Queer Resource Center.  And yes, if you use the word queer it is hate speech, but if they use it then it is fine.

Good pro-life news from Kenya

Abortion is the worst export from the West.  Thankfully, many countries are resisting this evil.  I have a real heart for Kenya after five mission trips and numerous dear friends there, so I was glad to see this: Kenya Pro-Lifers Defeat Western Effort to Expand Abortion.

When Kenyans voted on a new constitution in 2010, a massive publicity campaign – heavily funded by the Obama administration – assured voters it would not legalize abortion. In fact, “Life begins at conception” is in the constitution.

But the Constitution also allowed abortion in certain circumstances. Pro-lifers warned there would be more to come.

Abortion proponents, including those from the United States and Europe, drafted a set of policies for the Kenyan Ministry of Health that would have imposed abortion on the Kenyan medical system. The policies were rejected this week, according to a source close to the effort. Pro-lifers now want Kenyan legislators to denounce the attempt to expand abortion through the Ministry of Health.

What is truly despicable is how the Left is so pro-abortion that they borrowed money from our grandchildren to try to increase abortions in Kenya.

During the referendum for Kenya’s constitution, the Obama administration spent $18 million and directed U.S. personnel, including Peace Corp volunteers, to campaign for it. President Obama would visit Kenya, it was promised, if they passed the Constitution but he never did.

That’s what you should expect from a political party that is so pro-abortion that they want to increase abortions by removing restrictions and requiring taxpayer-funded abortions.  From the Democrats’ platform:

The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.

If you voted for Obama and other Democrats then you are part of the problem.  Please reconsider your views.  

Wendy Davis fought for late-term abortions, so you should vote for her.

And anyone who opposes her is anti-women.

At least that’s what the Left would have you believe.

It doesn’t matter that she lied under oath about her background.

It doesn’t matter that her lies were uncovered by a reporter who leans left politically, it was obviously the fault of the Right.

It doesn’t matter that she blamed her opponent, Greg Abbott, even though he had nothing to do with the story — and even if he had, it wouldn’t have changed the fact that Davis lied.

It doesn’t matter that her “feel sorry for me” campaign is built on lies.

It doesn’t matter that this self-made, reliant woman divorced her 2nd husband the day after he made the last payment for her law degree (after that he went into his retirement savings to pay for her education).

It doesn’t matter that she was such a bad mother that her biological daughter wanted her step-dad to have custody of her when Wendy divorced him.

It doesn’t matter that a court ordered her not to use alcohol or drugs before meeting with her daughters.

In documents obtained by RedState, Wendy Davis’s own child requested her father be her custodian. Likewise, in filing his divorce against Wendy Davis, her husband requested the courtenter the temporary restraining order.

The court, without an evidentiary hearing, did so. See the temporary restraining order here. The court ordered that Wendy Davis “be immediately restrained from . . . using illegal drugs or consuming alcohol within 24 hours before or during the period of possession of or access to the child.”

The court also ordered Wendy Davis to keep out of her residence anyone she was having “intimate or dating relationship[s]” with while children were present between 10pm and 6am.

The Dallas Morning News reported Davis’s husband, who paid Davis’s way through Harvard Law School by cashing in his 401(K) and taking out a loan, claimed Davis committed adultery on him.

Davis’s husband got custody of the children and the court ordered Wendy Davis to pay child support.

It doesn’t matter that even the majority of pro-choice people oppose late term abortions, making Davis a pro-abortion extremist by any standard.

It doesn’t matter that nearly all gender-selection abortions kill females for the sole reason that they are female.  That isn’t the ultimate misogyny, it is a female’s right to kill their unborn daughters for being female!

It doesn’t matter that so many women abort their children because of the pressure from the fathers of the children (such as this case where the abortive mother found healing through Christ) and that so many males support abortion rights.  This is a woman’s issue!

It doesn’t matter that most of these abortions are to kill babies with “defects,” real or imagined, because the issues can’t be diagnosed until later in pregnancy.  And it really doesn’t matter that if Greg Abbott’s disability was noted in utero instead of happening as an adult that Wendy would have fought for the right to abort him.

It doesn’t matter if you claim that your wheelchair-bound opponent hasn’t walked a day in your shoes, because the Leftist media will give you a pass.

None of that matters.  If you are a pro-abortion extremist then you can be hailed as an “incredible woman” by the Girl Scouts. You will be fawned over by the Leftist media.  People will donate to your campaign.

This is how extreme the Left is: They love abortion so much that you can get away with anything as long as you support unrestricted abortions.  This isn’t news, of course.  We knew when the feminists gave Bill Clinton a pass that all they really cared about was abortion.  They should have led the parade for an accomplished woman like Sarah Palin.  But she was pro-life so she had to be destroyed.

The Left’s love of abortion is Satanic.  It is best summarized in the platform of the Democratic party:

The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.

It is too bad that the enduring image of Davis portrayed by the Left is of her tennis shoes and not the bodies of those killed by abortions.

Russia’s President Putin is right

At least about the marketing of LGBTQPPX* propaganda to kids.  Via Putin says Russia is not ‘going after’ gays:

SOCHI, Russia (Reuters) – Russia is not “going after” gays, President Vladimir Putin said on Friday, defending a ban on “propaganda” about homosexuality that has brought criticism from the West ahead of the Winter Olympics.

The Kremlin hopes the games, starting on February 7 in the city of Sochi on the Black Sea, will showcase Russia’s modern face more than two decades after the Soviet Union collapsed.

. . .

But Russia last year upset the West and human rights activists by banning what it called the promotion of homosexuality among minors. Calls for a mass boycott of the games have failed, but the row has clouded the build-up to the event.

Leave it to the moral freaks to try and ruin something as great as the Olympics.  All Russia is saying is that you can’t market these perversions to kids.  Something about millstones around your neck comes to mind.

If you want to tell kids about those lifestyles, at least tell them the truth: They weren’t “born that way,” and those lifestyles are incredibly destructive to your emotional, spiritual and physical life.  Even the “experts” on the Left know that those preferences can be fluid in younger people.  Don’t poison their minds and tell them that they are permanently fixed.

And do tell them facts like this: Gays have 40+ times higher rates of Syphilis and HIV, partly because 62% of men who know they are HIV-positive have unprotected sex with men.  Meditate on that for a moment.  How evil and vile do you have to be to knowingly risk infecting others with a deadly disease, just because you don’t want to wear a condom when having sex?  That is one of the most profoundly selfish acts imaginable, yet the mainstream media never tells you about these things.  Are all gays guilty of that?  No, but 62% of those who contract HIV are.  And 100% of those who hide the truth are guilty.

Critics say the law is discriminatory and part of a rolling back of human rights and democratic freedoms under Putin, who has taken a more conservative course on social issues since returning to the presidency in mid-2012.

“There is no ban on non-traditional forms of sexual interaction between people. We have a ban on propaganda of homosexuality,” Putin told a meeting with young volunteers preparing for the games.

“We ban nothing, we aren’t going after anyone, we have no responsibility for such contacts.”

Putin said some U.S. states had laws envisaging criminal responsibility for gay sexual intercourse.

“We have no such thing, people can feel free and at ease but please leave the children in peace,” he said.

It is a sad and ironic day when a former KGB leader rightly lectures the U.S. about basic morality.

* Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Questioning Pedophile Polygamy X (X = whatever they come up with next) — the same rational for oxymoronic “same-sex marriage” and teaching kids how “natural” any of the preferences are applies to all of them, whether one explicitly supports them all or not.