EMOTIONS ARE IRRELEVANT WHERE THE LAW IS CONCERNED
This is a good example of what happens when conservatives get angry with me for setting them straight.
This is a smart phone screen capture of a post from Shawn Hooper, who got his knickers bunched up over a debate we had discussing the aftermath of a Hispanic father in Texas who killed another man he found molesting his daughter.
Let me say right up front, I am not defending any child molesters. It seems like that would be understood, but for people like Mr. Hooper, it must be said.
I explained in the course of the debate on Mr. Hooper's thread that 'self defense' involves the protection of one's own life or the lives of others, or defense from a threat of great bodily harm. Once the threat is gone, one cannot continue to attack the perpetrator. By law.
The father in this case will not be tried for any crime, and I think that is a mistake. Sure, he'd never be convicted of murder (my position that Hooper decided to ignore), but I think that 2nd degree manslaughter could have been called for.
Emotions get us into trouble when we discuss the law. Sure, emotionally, we'd all like to beat all child molesters to death. But that's not how the laws and legal system are set up in this country. Hooper advocates taking the law into his own hands. I asked him that specific question, and he refused at least half a dozen times to answer. But that is what he believes.
Hooper instead went into "all laws are not good" and "you're a legalist" and "Obama is bad" and "Nazis are bad", desperate attempts to change the issue in the discussion, and I wouldn't have any of it. Time and time again I took him back to this: If you advocate for taking the law into your own hands, you are advocating for anarchy.
We do not want a country where people think on these things emotionally. The fact is, if your child is being molested, the first thing is self defense. ONCE THE MOLESTATION HAS BEEN INTERRUPTED AND THE CHILD HAS BEEN MADE SAFE, the next step is to call the police and have the perp arrested, NOT to beat him to death.
I feel for the father in that case in Texas, and I understand that people want to celebrate the fact he beat a molester to death. But in our country, with our legal system, you have only the right to defend yourself, not to take the law into your own hands.
There is a new case in Colorado now where a woman who bludgeoned to death her child's molester with a baseball bat is going to be charged with murder. A harsh penalty, no doubt, but Mr. Hooper would be well advised to pay attention to this case and learn from it.
Mr. Hooper said that I unfriended him on Facebook because of his viewpoint. That is nonsense. I could make this case in my sleep. I could spell it out in urine in the snow. Hooper and his friends were so filled up with emotion, they were unable to see the reasons for laws like this.
Hooper warns me not to molest his children; an obvious desperate insult because he feels, rightly, that my argument made more sense than his defense of taking the law into one's own hands.
I unfriended Mr. Hooper because he posted vile, disgusting, blood drenched pictures of an aborted baby, and on Facebook anyone can see these pictures. It is not Mr. Hooper's place to force anyone to see pictures like that, and I won't subject myself to his violent pornography. So I unfriended him for that.
The fact that I don't have to read anymore of his ignorant drivel about laws he does not understand is just a bonus. -Jz
Saturday, September 28, 2013
Sunday, September 15, 2013
Sunday, September 8, 2013
• LGBT Plans To Disrupt Olympics In Russia!
Plans to smuggle pro-LGBT propaganda into Russia and disrupt
Olympics revealed at "gay" journalists convention in Boston. Media,
athletes, and even Olympic teams working with LGBT activists
MassResistance exclusive: Homosexual activists in the U.S. are working with media groups, "out LGBT athletes," and both the US and Canadian Olympic hockey teams in a secret plan to smuggle rainbow flags, homosexual propaganda, etc. into Russia. Their intent is to disrupt the 2014 Winter Olympics with homosexual symbolism, according to a presenter at the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Convention in Boston on August 24. The planned disruption is a retaliation by the homosexual movement to Russia's recent ban on the public promotion of homosexuality.
They are also talking about "utilizing diplomatic channels" to help smuggle the
homosexual flags and other materials into Russia.
Patrick Burke, co-founder of the You Can Play Project, a campaign to "end homophobia in sports," also referred to plans for athletes to wave rainbow flags on awards podiums and at the closing ceremonies. Burke told the group that "we can't talk about that publicly" but "there's a lot going on behind the scenes.".
Luckily, MassResistance was present and recorded the presentation.
Russia's ban on public promotion of homosexuality
The 2014 Winter Olympics will be held in Sochi, Russia on February 7-23. This past June, as MassResistance reported, Russia's parliament overwhelmingly passed a bill which bans the promotion of "non-traditional sexual relations" to minors, and which also includes bans on "gay pride" rallies or other public promotion of "homosexual propaganda."
The Russian government has made it clear that the ban also covers participants and attendees of the 2014 Olympics. According to Burke, Russian authorities have decided to preemptively confiscate rainbow flags and pins at airports.
Remarks made at "Out on the Playing Field" session at conference
The National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association (NLGJA) is a powerful national organization of homosexual journalists from major television news, newspapers, radio, and more. Their annual conference was held August 22-25 at the Boston Park Plaza Hotel.
Burke spoke at a conference session titled, "Game Changer: Out on the Playing Field and In the Press Box," Its description: "Hear from sportswriters and athletes who can tell you what homophobia they still see in sports and where there are areas of real improvement." Burke apparently thought he was talking to an all-"gay" audience, and was surprisingly candid about what he's been doing to help organize the disruption at the upcoming Olympics.
"Rainbow flag on the podium" and more
Here is what Patrick Burke said in his presentation about the plan to infiltrate the Olympic Games and embarrass the Russian government:
An outrageous embarrassment to Americans
The Russian government's bold efforts to protect children and society has attracted applause and support from pro-family organizations around the world, and also from countries such as Nigeria and Uganda who are also dealing with these issues.
If this outrageous stunt is successful, it will be an embarrassment not only to the Russian government -- which is working hard to have a clean, wholesome atmosphere for its Olympic games -- but certainly to many Americans, given that American corporations, American athletes, and possibly even our government would be involved in this.
The pro-homosexual Obama Administration has already complained loudly about Russia's new law. And Obama himself, while visiting Russia this past week, in a purposeful affront to the Russian government met with Russian homosexual activists in St. Petersburg, along with his national security advisor and the US Ambassador to Russia. So it would not be surprising Obama had the US diplomatic corps involved with this, too.
The international fallout from this, given the wide range of those involved, would surely be considerable.
Hopefully, our publicizing this will help severely dampen their plans.
MassResistance exclusive: Homosexual activists in the U.S. are working with media groups, "out LGBT athletes," and both the US and Canadian Olympic hockey teams in a secret plan to smuggle rainbow flags, homosexual propaganda, etc. into Russia. Their intent is to disrupt the 2014 Winter Olympics with homosexual symbolism, according to a presenter at the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Convention in Boston on August 24. The planned disruption is a retaliation by the homosexual movement to Russia's recent ban on the public promotion of homosexuality.
Patrick Burke, co-founder of the You Can Play Project, a campaign to "end homophobia in sports," also referred to plans for athletes to wave rainbow flags on awards podiums and at the closing ceremonies. Burke told the group that "we can't talk about that publicly" but "there's a lot going on behind the scenes.".
Luckily, MassResistance was present and recorded the presentation.
| The Park Plaza Hotel in downtown Boston, during the conference. |
The 2014 Winter Olympics will be held in Sochi, Russia on February 7-23. This past June, as MassResistance reported, Russia's parliament overwhelmingly passed a bill which bans the promotion of "non-traditional sexual relations" to minors, and which also includes bans on "gay pride" rallies or other public promotion of "homosexual propaganda."
The Russian government has made it clear that the ban also covers participants and attendees of the 2014 Olympics. According to Burke, Russian authorities have decided to preemptively confiscate rainbow flags and pins at airports.
Remarks made at "Out on the Playing Field" session at conference
The National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association (NLGJA) is a powerful national organization of homosexual journalists from major television news, newspapers, radio, and more. Their annual conference was held August 22-25 at the Boston Park Plaza Hotel.
Burke spoke at a conference session titled, "Game Changer: Out on the Playing Field and In the Press Box," Its description: "Hear from sportswriters and athletes who can tell you what homophobia they still see in sports and where there are areas of real improvement." Burke apparently thought he was talking to an all-"gay" audience, and was surprisingly candid about what he's been doing to help organize the disruption at the upcoming Olympics.
| Patrick Burke prepares to address his session
at the NLGJA conference. [MassResistance photo] |
Here is what Patrick Burke said in his presentation about the plan to infiltrate the Olympic Games and embarrass the Russian government:
We're going to have three weeks of sustained media presence there. We are going to have out LGBT athletes there. We are going to have very vocal and visible allies there.(NOTE: Open recording and video taping of the conference and its sessions were allowed. Some sessions were recorded and/or videoed by several people.)
We've spoken with the Canadian and U.S. hockey teams. We're going to be doing work with both of those teams.
The frustrating part right now is we can't talk about that publicly because if you talk about it publicly, the Russians don't let you in the country. So when everyone keeps asking us "What are you going to do when you get there? What are you going to do when you get there?" and we keep having to say "We can't tell you."
The Russians have said they'll confiscate rainbow flags if you try and bring them in your regular luggage. They've said they'll confiscate pins. We are talking about utilizing diplomatic channels to get things into the country.
There's a lot going on behind the scenes that will frustrate people because it won't be made public until you see an athlete on a medal stand or at closing ceremonies. There are two types of backlash that we're concerned about.
One is government. Where a journalist or athlete whoever it might be, is arrested or is, you know, fined, is deported. Not that anyone wants to stay in Russia if the Olympics are over. That's certainly the type of backlash that we're concerned about.
The second is non-governmental groups. We looked into securing a pride house in Sochi. One of my very good friends basically runs the Continental Hockey League and he knows every Russian billionaire out there. We said what would it take to get a pride house? He said he'd 'need security.' Well yeah, get some security guards. He said 'no, someone would shoot it up.' He said 'you would need ex-KGB to secure it. You guys can't afford that.' Well probably not. So there's concern on my end about non-governmental groups taking matters into their own hands.
I think the athletes are going to be safe. I think if you see an athlete or a journalist do something, unless it's excessively provocative -- and I use that term from the Russian point of view; I wouldn't consider anything excessive -- you're going to see athletes deported. I don't think you're going to see fines. I don't think you're going to see arrests. I think you're going to see, someone waves a rainbow flag on the podium; you go right from the podium to an airplane. You get sent home.
An outrageous embarrassment to Americans
The Russian government's bold efforts to protect children and society has attracted applause and support from pro-family organizations around the world, and also from countries such as Nigeria and Uganda who are also dealing with these issues.
If this outrageous stunt is successful, it will be an embarrassment not only to the Russian government -- which is working hard to have a clean, wholesome atmosphere for its Olympic games -- but certainly to many Americans, given that American corporations, American athletes, and possibly even our government would be involved in this.
The pro-homosexual Obama Administration has already complained loudly about Russia's new law. And Obama himself, while visiting Russia this past week, in a purposeful affront to the Russian government met with Russian homosexual activists in St. Petersburg, along with his national security advisor and the US Ambassador to Russia. So it would not be surprising Obama had the US diplomatic corps involved with this, too.
The international fallout from this, given the wide range of those involved, would surely be considerable.
Hopefully, our publicizing this will help severely dampen their plans.
Friday, September 6, 2013
• Very Funny Dialogue On Tea Party Community
*UPDATES BELOW: JIMMY Z BANNED BY TEA PARTY COMMUNITY OVER THIS BLOG POST & THREATENED WITH LEGAL HARASSMENT*
------------------
I am going to post this here for all eternity; a classic smack-down by your show host. The issue was the dismissal of a Colonel who failed a performance inspection and nuclear missiles were his responsibility. The source of the article was Military.com. Jim here felt that any fired military officer means Obama is up to no good, which is ridiculous; and in order to prove he was right, Jim took a guess as to who ran the Military.com website - and this is where we pick up the comment thread from earlier this evening...
------------------
---------------
The really funny part is that a very healthy thread was removed shortly thereafter - there must have been 50 comments in about 30 minutes, presumably because Mr. K begged the person who posted the story originally to pull it down. It has disappeared forever, but I knew this was epic enough to clip and save some of the transcript. I knew Jim couldn't allow it to remain. -Jz
------------------
LATEST: Saturday, 7 September, I was banned without warning and without notice, for who knows what length of time, for posting this on my blog. Never mind how many times folks attacked me personally on their little website, Tea Party Community. Never mind a few times I reported spam and harassment, and no monitor ever responded. Remember, these are supposedly conservatives and they run this social website FAR WORSE than Facebook! Hard for me to believe, and I am very critical of Facebook, but it's true.
Tea Party Community is run by petty, sneering, cowardly people who want anyone who is not in lockstep with the military coup-advocating radical right (can't believe I have to use that term either!) to be removed from their midst. Would I say that these people operate just like petty, sneering cowardly liberals and left wing pond scum? Yes. Which social network is the better website? Facebook. Or if you want a conservative alternative, use Freedom Torch.
------------------
LATEST: Sunday, 8 September, 1:00pm PDT: Today I received an email declaring that my parody/satire alteration of their 'logo' (Didn't they borrow [steal?] that from the Gadsden flag? I think they did) is bothering them and they're going to throw a legal hissy fit: "I see you are using our official logo on your blog and have defaced it in a slanderous fashion. I would advise removing it immediately, or you'll definitely here [sic] from our Lawyer."
Defaced it! Haha, I made it more truthful is what I did. Ah, conservatives. Well we can see here that weak conservatives aren't much better than whiny liberals, are they. Hell, with all the parodies and satire of graphics and logos and everything else that conservatives do online, you'd think Tea Party Community could take it. And by the way, the fellow who wrote to me never answered any of my email asking why I was banned three times, or how long the ban would last. Not very upright these people.
I have more on TPC, shocking stuff, outrageous stuff - but I have to get permission from the source to report it. -Jz
------------------
LATEST: Sunday, 8 September 3:45pm PDT: Latest email from TPC and my response. TPC said, "Parody? I fail to see the humor as will our lawyer. You've been given fair warning about using our copyrighted material." Ooh, and what material it is they copyrighted, isn't it? Their own theft of the Gadsden flag artwork.
My response: "Satire and parody aren't always humorous - and is rarely so for the person being satirized. I pixelated your logos you big baby. But my criticism stands and I will be talking about your site being run by petty, sniveling conspiracy theorists. There was no slander. Who are you kidding? Free speech, remember that? And by the way: You heisted your logo from the Gadsden flag! What a joke.
"You NEVER answered my emails for explanations - you're a coward. I was banned THREE TIMES for no reason, and you are afraid of standing up to the wormy cretins you put in power as moderators. Three strikes - I wouldn't come back to that poorly run site if you begged me to. The truth is out. TPC will fail.
"You can't avoid parody. Who do you think you are? Go pound sand, Tim. The Constitution means more than your little website.
"Funny isn't it? There turns out to be more free speech at Facebook than there is at TPC, which I PREDICTED on Facebook the day I first heard that your social network was opening up. Conservatives hate debating. Conservatives really are not very well informed, as the loudest of the loudmouths on your website prove. They get all bent out of shape when the truth upsets their right wing spin.
"And if you and your people can't stand up to big bad Jimmy Z, how in hell do you think you can stand up to Obama and his machine? What a joke! You should have stood up to the cranks at your website, but you didn't have the balls. See you around." -Jimmy Z
------------------
I am going to post this here for all eternity; a classic smack-down by your show host. The issue was the dismissal of a Colonel who failed a performance inspection and nuclear missiles were his responsibility. The source of the article was Military.com. Jim here felt that any fired military officer means Obama is up to no good, which is ridiculous; and in order to prove he was right, Jim took a guess as to who ran the Military.com website - and this is where we pick up the comment thread from earlier this evening...
------------------
Jim K.
Military.com is run by the Secretary of
Defense, a bunch of Obizmal appointed libtards with an agenda. Sorry... Nice
try.
Jimmy Z
Oh you should NEVER take a wild guess when I'm
around. I smack down wild guesses like the perfect lob in tennis [FYI, this is
the reason Jim called me a troll and left]:
"Military.com is the website created by Military Advantage to be a portal for U.S. military members. In early 2004, Military Advantage was purchased by Monster Worldwide. The company's main revenue streams are advertising, military-themed products and lead generation for military recruiters.
"The website was founded by Christopher Michel in 1999 and went live in 2000.
"Military Advantage's advisory board includes two former members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as well as other academic and business leaders. President of Military.com, Admiral Terry "T" McCreary served as the Chief of Naval Information (CHINFO) on the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
"Military.com, which claims more than 10 million members, also owns Fredsplace.org, Defensetech.org, Milblogging.com, DoDBuzz.com and MilitaryBenefits.com."
"Military.com is the website created by Military Advantage to be a portal for U.S. military members. In early 2004, Military Advantage was purchased by Monster Worldwide. The company's main revenue streams are advertising, military-themed products and lead generation for military recruiters.
"The website was founded by Christopher Michel in 1999 and went live in 2000.
"Military Advantage's advisory board includes two former members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as well as other academic and business leaders. President of Military.com, Admiral Terry "T" McCreary served as the Chief of Naval Information (CHINFO) on the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
"Military.com, which claims more than 10 million members, also owns Fredsplace.org, Defensetech.org, Milblogging.com, DoDBuzz.com and MilitaryBenefits.com."
Jim K.
I'm done feeding the trolls. You can
bang your head against a troll all night long and all you will have to show for
it is a headache :p
Jimmy Z
Name calling is capitulation. Say goodnight, Jim.
---------------
The really funny part is that a very healthy thread was removed shortly thereafter - there must have been 50 comments in about 30 minutes, presumably because Mr. K begged the person who posted the story originally to pull it down. It has disappeared forever, but I knew this was epic enough to clip and save some of the transcript. I knew Jim couldn't allow it to remain. -Jz
------------------
LATEST: Saturday, 7 September, I was banned without warning and without notice, for who knows what length of time, for posting this on my blog. Never mind how many times folks attacked me personally on their little website, Tea Party Community. Never mind a few times I reported spam and harassment, and no monitor ever responded. Remember, these are supposedly conservatives and they run this social website FAR WORSE than Facebook! Hard for me to believe, and I am very critical of Facebook, but it's true.
Tea Party Community is run by petty, sneering, cowardly people who want anyone who is not in lockstep with the military coup-advocating radical right (can't believe I have to use that term either!) to be removed from their midst. Would I say that these people operate just like petty, sneering cowardly liberals and left wing pond scum? Yes. Which social network is the better website? Facebook. Or if you want a conservative alternative, use Freedom Torch.
------------------
LATEST: Sunday, 8 September, 1:00pm PDT: Today I received an email declaring that my parody/satire alteration of their 'logo' (Didn't they borrow [steal?] that from the Gadsden flag? I think they did) is bothering them and they're going to throw a legal hissy fit: "I see you are using our official logo on your blog and have defaced it in a slanderous fashion. I would advise removing it immediately, or you'll definitely here [sic] from our Lawyer."
Defaced it! Haha, I made it more truthful is what I did. Ah, conservatives. Well we can see here that weak conservatives aren't much better than whiny liberals, are they. Hell, with all the parodies and satire of graphics and logos and everything else that conservatives do online, you'd think Tea Party Community could take it. And by the way, the fellow who wrote to me never answered any of my email asking why I was banned three times, or how long the ban would last. Not very upright these people.
I have more on TPC, shocking stuff, outrageous stuff - but I have to get permission from the source to report it. -Jz
------------------
LATEST: Sunday, 8 September 3:45pm PDT: Latest email from TPC and my response. TPC said, "Parody? I fail to see the humor as will our lawyer. You've been given fair warning about using our copyrighted material." Ooh, and what material it is they copyrighted, isn't it? Their own theft of the Gadsden flag artwork.
My response: "Satire and parody aren't always humorous - and is rarely so for the person being satirized. I pixelated your logos you big baby. But my criticism stands and I will be talking about your site being run by petty, sniveling conspiracy theorists. There was no slander. Who are you kidding? Free speech, remember that? And by the way: You heisted your logo from the Gadsden flag! What a joke.
"You NEVER answered my emails for explanations - you're a coward. I was banned THREE TIMES for no reason, and you are afraid of standing up to the wormy cretins you put in power as moderators. Three strikes - I wouldn't come back to that poorly run site if you begged me to. The truth is out. TPC will fail.
"You can't avoid parody. Who do you think you are? Go pound sand, Tim. The Constitution means more than your little website.
"Funny isn't it? There turns out to be more free speech at Facebook than there is at TPC, which I PREDICTED on Facebook the day I first heard that your social network was opening up. Conservatives hate debating. Conservatives really are not very well informed, as the loudest of the loudmouths on your website prove. They get all bent out of shape when the truth upsets their right wing spin.
"And if you and your people can't stand up to big bad Jimmy Z, how in hell do you think you can stand up to Obama and his machine? What a joke! You should have stood up to the cranks at your website, but you didn't have the balls. See you around." -Jimmy Z
Friday, August 30, 2013
• Can Obama Attack Syria Without Congress?
From the National Review morning email today:
What Is the Consequence of a War Without Congressional Authorization?
Call me schizophrenic. Call me an extremist. You can recall that I'm supportive of air strikes to punish Syrian dictator Bashir Assad for using chemical weapons -- as long as we're sure his side used the chemical weapons and that he ordered the launch.
But if a president were to A) take military action against Syria without seeking a resolution authorizing military action or B) Congress rejected the resolution, but he went ahead anyway . . .Would that be grounds for impeachment? Probably not. There's some precedent for this sort of thing:
What Is the Consequence of a War Without Congressional Authorization?
Call me schizophrenic. Call me an extremist. You can recall that I'm supportive of air strikes to punish Syrian dictator Bashir Assad for using chemical weapons -- as long as we're sure his side used the chemical weapons and that he ordered the launch.
But if a president were to A) take military action against Syria without seeking a resolution authorizing military action or B) Congress rejected the resolution, but he went ahead anyway . . .Would that be grounds for impeachment? Probably not. There's some precedent for this sort of thing:
The War Powers Resolution passed by Congress in 1973 requires that the president seek consent from Congress before force is used, or within 60 days of the start of hostilities. It also says the president must provide Congress with reports throughout the conflict.
Since 1973, the United States has used military force in Grenada in 1983, Panama in 1989, Iraq in 1991, Haiti in 1994 and Kosovo in 1999. In all those instances, presidents -- both Democrats and Republicans -- sidestepped Congress and committed U.S. military forces without obtaining congressional approval.
Thursday, August 29, 2013
• On Homosexual Marriage: It's Not Over
It's not over
August 29, 2013 | Share with Friends
Dear Jimmy,"It ain't over till it's over," as the old saying goes.
And the fight for marriage in America is far from over.
The media would have you believe, and the radical homosexual activists would have you believe, and the liberals in Washington would have you believe that the case is closed because the Supreme Court ruling on DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) was the last word.
But they're wrong.
The high court's DOMA ruling, wrong-headed as it was, only struck down Section 3 of the law: this means people in same-sex "marriages" who live in states that allow it, can receive federal marriage benefits -- technically, once you get beyond the bluster of Justice Kennedy, the ruling accomplishes nothing more.
So those seeking to redefine marriage out of existence are engaged in a massive propaganda campaign selling the erroneous view that same-sex "marriage" is now "the American way." And that those holding the traditional view are bigots that have been defeated by those of a progressive mindset.
Meanwhile, they're taking advantage of their public relations momentum to mount a strong drive to completely strike down DOMA and to do what the Supreme Court didn't -- and truly make same-sex "marriage" the law of the land: legalized in all 50 states.
They're pushing the ironically named "Respect for Marriage Act" to eliminate DOMA so the ederal government would recognize "same-sex" marriages in every state. Already there are some 161 cosponsors in the House, and 41 in the Senate. If supporters of traditional marriage are lulled into inaction by the radical Left's misinformation campaign, this bill will become law. And something far worse than the Supreme Court ruling will happen to America.
- On an economic level: disaster.
The Government Accounting Office has determined there are some 1,138
mentions of marriage in federal law. This means nationwide legalization
of same-sex "marriage" will make an enormous negative impact on the
government's budget and thus the country financially.
- On a social level: danger.
Forcing the redefinition of marriage on all states will mean a loss
of religious liberty. It already means parents are no longer in control
of what their children are taught about sexual morality in public
schools. It already means bakers and florists and photographers are
being forced to participate in same-sex "weddings" or face fines and
lawsuits. Christian business owners are suffering the consequences as
provisions of this law are imposed upon them.
- On a spiritual level: persecution.
The radical homosexual lobby wants to cause massive disruption to our
culture by making homosexual activity "normal" -- and objections to
homosexual activity "hate." They call us "haters" because we will not
affirm and celebrate their sexual deviance. In fact, warning them about
the risks is the loving thing to do.
Yet there is hope.
FRC Action is fighting back, and with your strong support, we will keep fighting. I urge you to stand with us, for the truth of God's Word regarding marriage and its benefits to society, and regarding the harms of homosexual behavior on individuals and society.
We are not alone in this battle. There are strong, principled conservatives in Congress and they are standing firm.
The stakes are huge. Since the Supreme Court ruling, the lines have been drawn. This is no longer simply about marriage. This is about the federal government maneuvering a step closer to being able to silence Bible-believing churches and their values...
We must put maximum pressure on conservative leaders to take a bold stand in defense of marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
We're approaching the end of our fiscal year on September 30th, and we must meet our $400,000 goal by this date in order to keep operating in the black and continue our critically important work, without pause or delay, on Capitol Hill.
Your generosity today will help us finish our fiscal year strong and empower our Action team to pull out the stops and protect America from the dangerous "Respect for Marriage Act" or any similar bill. We've got to be there on the Hill to support strong conservatives and to bring every possible influence to bear on those who remain "on the fence" and are open to persuasion.
This fight is not over. FRC Action will stand for this foundational truth. But we need you to be part of it. Please sign and return the petition, and give as generously as possible. We will represent your interests on Capitol Hill, we will fight hard, and we will put all of our experience and expertise to work on your behalf. But we need you to send us and keep us there.
Standing (Ephesians 6:13),
Tony Perkins
President, Family Research Council
P.S. Please forward this to at least one friend.
Saturday, August 24, 2013
• Syria: Who's Gassing Who?
This is a story a friend told me today, and we've decided to keep it anonymous. This friend is completely credible. We are looking into it further. -Jz
Right down the road from my house is a store that is owned by 2 brothers from Yemen. They are wonderful people and they love America. The oldest brother and myself have an ongoing conversation about politics and what is going on over in Syria.
I asked him about the Syrian government gassing the citizens with nerve gas. He told me that it was not the Syrian government that used the nerve gas: He said it was the Muslim Brotherhood.
Yesterday I went into the store and he showed me a video of the Muslim brotherhood testing the nerve gas on rabbits and they showed hundreds of canisters and bottles of the nerve gas in the video. He translated the video for me since it was spoken in Arabic. If what he translated was true, then it was the Muslim Brotherhood that gassed all of those children.
He said that Obama is blaming it on the Syrian government so that he can send troops over to help the Muslim Brotherhood. He said that Obama is arming the Muslim Brotherhood with weapons and chemicals.
All of his relatives still live in Yemen as does his wife and children. He is trying to get them here but it cost him $115,000 to get here himself. He talks to his family over there everyday and he gets reports about what is going on.
Right down the road from my house is a store that is owned by 2 brothers from Yemen. They are wonderful people and they love America. The oldest brother and myself have an ongoing conversation about politics and what is going on over in Syria.
I asked him about the Syrian government gassing the citizens with nerve gas. He told me that it was not the Syrian government that used the nerve gas: He said it was the Muslim Brotherhood.
Yesterday I went into the store and he showed me a video of the Muslim brotherhood testing the nerve gas on rabbits and they showed hundreds of canisters and bottles of the nerve gas in the video. He translated the video for me since it was spoken in Arabic. If what he translated was true, then it was the Muslim Brotherhood that gassed all of those children.
He said that Obama is blaming it on the Syrian government so that he can send troops over to help the Muslim Brotherhood. He said that Obama is arming the Muslim Brotherhood with weapons and chemicals.
All of his relatives still live in Yemen as does his wife and children. He is trying to get them here but it cost him $115,000 to get here himself. He talks to his family over there everyday and he gets reports about what is going on.
Friday, August 23, 2013
• Federal judge's ruling against Pastor Scott Lively
Ruling could have
horrible international consequences for pro-family movement!
On Wednesday, August 14, a federal judge, denying a motion to dismiss, ruled that a Soros-backed pro-homosexual "civil rights" organization, Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) based in New York, can move forward and sue Pastor Scott Lively of Springfield, Mass. for allegedly committing international "crimes against humanity."
Absurd charges against Lively
This unprecedented lawsuit is based on pro-family speeches and writings critical of homosexuality by Pastor Lively at conferences in Uganda and in the United States. CCR is claiming that Lively's opinions were the direct cause of about a dozen minor incidents of harassment in Uganda over a period of ten years, which they consider "crimes against humanity." They offer no evidence that the perpetrators of these incidents had ever communicated with Lively, or had even read or heard anything by him! Instead, they make the preposterous charge that somehow Lively's few speeches and writings created a "virulently hostile environment" in the entire country of Uganda, and thus he is responsible.
In our exclusive coverage of the hearing back in January on the motion to dismiss, we reported how we sat in the courtroom and heard Lively's Liberty Counsel lawyers eviscerate virtually every argument brought up by the plaintiffs. At one point Federal Judge Michael A. Ponsor even told the CCR lawyer that he is "struggling to see actionable behavior" in anything Lively did or said, and that he can't see that any of Lively's conduct that amounts to "persecution" or "conspiracy."
Unusually harsh and hostile ruling on motion to dismiss
But that was then. In his 79-page ruling issued last week, Judge Ponsor accepts all of the points raised by the Soros-backed plaintiffs and denies all of the points raised by Lively's lawyers. In addition, Ponsor excoriates Pastor Lively's "offensive conduct" relating to his pro-family activity and his "distasteful" use of the First Amendment.
We're living in a time of outrageous and hostile anti-family court rulings. The Supreme Court and state "gay marriage" rulings, the rulings against pro-family businesses, recent "transgender rights" rulings, and rulings against parents of schoolchildren are just a few. But this ruling goes far beyond anything we've ever seen or even read about.
Detailed analysis coming up. Because of the egregious and convoluted nature of this case and the ruling, MassResistance is preparing a detailed analysis of the judge's ruling and how the judge has determined that Pastor Lively -- presumably no longer protected by the First Amendment -- can "legally" be sued in an American court on these charges.
What this is REALLY all about: a new international standard for "crimes against humanity"
Why is this New York-based Soros-based group going to such unusual efforts and expense to prosecute Pastor Scott Lively for international "crimes against humanity" -- simply because of things that he said?
This is not an accident. It could represent for them an unprecedented weapon for the international homosexual movement going forward.
A major driving point of the hardcore homosexual movement is the internal narrative among themselves that criticism or distaste of homosexual behavior (what they call "homophobia") leads to genocidal extermination of homosexuals. To us (and most people) that may seem to be a paranoid delusion. But that is what they tell each other that pro-family people really desire. And it's a big part of what drives them to relentlessly silence any disagreement of their behaviors through intimidation and harassment as well as oppressive anti-bullying laws, "anti-discrimination" laws, and other tactics.
However, their bigger goal is worldwide. At the end of their complaint against Lively the plaintiffs declare what they are asking for. Included is: "a declaratory judgment holding that Defendant's conduct was in violation of the law of nations." And a preponderance of the arguments in the complaint clearly lead in that direction. Thus, it's clear that their real goal is much bigger than just punishing Scott Lively.
This case could essentially make Uganda the Nuremburg of the gay rights movement. They are seeking an official declaration from a United States Federal Court that "homophobic" speech and writings constitute international crimes against humanity because of the "climate of terror" that they would cause in a country.
This would have huge value to them. It's one thing for Barack Obama to go to other countries and chastise them about their laws and customs reflecting traditional values regarding homosexuality. But it's another to have the club of "crimes against humanity" behind it.
This case represents the declaration of a new global standard. The entire world would be put on notice that all disapproval of homosexuality must be ended. You can't criminalize homosexuality in your country anymore, or even have laws curtailing it in any way -- because that would be considered on the level of the Nazis' actions against the Jews.
And it would certainly be used against any number of individuals and groups here in America and around the world. That's the real problem. That's why they're putting so much effort into it. It's the opportunity they've been waiting for.

Pastor Scott Lively and his legal team outside the courthouse. From left: Horatio Mihet, Pastor Lively, Steve Crampton, Philip Moran
The next step: Lawsuit moves forward with "discovery"
phase
The plaintiffs appear to be moving as quickly as they can to start the "discovery" phase of the lawsuit in Springfield Federal District Court. Basically, the plaintiffs will demand to see tons of Lively's emails, records, and other material -- largely a fishing expedition, it would appear, to find anything that might strengthen their case. As usual, we will keep you informed.
A final note: We have been critical of pro-family legal defense efforts in important, high-profile cases over the years. Much of it has been terribly weak and simply second-rate. Not so with Liberty Counsel. In this case they have really impressed us. They've done a first-rate job and fought brilliantly. Unfortunately, they're just up against a completely corrupt and irrational legal system on a scale that resembles something out of the old Soviet Union. This is a disgrace. In our opinion, Judge Ponsor should be impeached and disbarred. But Lively's legal team is not giving up, and we're behind them.
On Wednesday, August 14, a federal judge, denying a motion to dismiss, ruled that a Soros-backed pro-homosexual "civil rights" organization, Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) based in New York, can move forward and sue Pastor Scott Lively of Springfield, Mass. for allegedly committing international "crimes against humanity."
|
|
Pastor Scott Lively refuses to back down and is being bitterly attacked by the homosexual movement. |
This unprecedented lawsuit is based on pro-family speeches and writings critical of homosexuality by Pastor Lively at conferences in Uganda and in the United States. CCR is claiming that Lively's opinions were the direct cause of about a dozen minor incidents of harassment in Uganda over a period of ten years, which they consider "crimes against humanity." They offer no evidence that the perpetrators of these incidents had ever communicated with Lively, or had even read or heard anything by him! Instead, they make the preposterous charge that somehow Lively's few speeches and writings created a "virulently hostile environment" in the entire country of Uganda, and thus he is responsible.
In our exclusive coverage of the hearing back in January on the motion to dismiss, we reported how we sat in the courtroom and heard Lively's Liberty Counsel lawyers eviscerate virtually every argument brought up by the plaintiffs. At one point Federal Judge Michael A. Ponsor even told the CCR lawyer that he is "struggling to see actionable behavior" in anything Lively did or said, and that he can't see that any of Lively's conduct that amounts to "persecution" or "conspiracy."
Unusually harsh and hostile ruling on motion to dismiss
But that was then. In his 79-page ruling issued last week, Judge Ponsor accepts all of the points raised by the Soros-backed plaintiffs and denies all of the points raised by Lively's lawyers. In addition, Ponsor excoriates Pastor Lively's "offensive conduct" relating to his pro-family activity and his "distasteful" use of the First Amendment.
We're living in a time of outrageous and hostile anti-family court rulings. The Supreme Court and state "gay marriage" rulings, the rulings against pro-family businesses, recent "transgender rights" rulings, and rulings against parents of schoolchildren are just a few. But this ruling goes far beyond anything we've ever seen or even read about.
Detailed analysis coming up. Because of the egregious and convoluted nature of this case and the ruling, MassResistance is preparing a detailed analysis of the judge's ruling and how the judge has determined that Pastor Lively -- presumably no longer protected by the First Amendment -- can "legally" be sued in an American court on these charges.
What this is REALLY all about: a new international standard for "crimes against humanity"
Why is this New York-based Soros-based group going to such unusual efforts and expense to prosecute Pastor Scott Lively for international "crimes against humanity" -- simply because of things that he said?
This is not an accident. It could represent for them an unprecedented weapon for the international homosexual movement going forward.
A major driving point of the hardcore homosexual movement is the internal narrative among themselves that criticism or distaste of homosexual behavior (what they call "homophobia") leads to genocidal extermination of homosexuals. To us (and most people) that may seem to be a paranoid delusion. But that is what they tell each other that pro-family people really desire. And it's a big part of what drives them to relentlessly silence any disagreement of their behaviors through intimidation and harassment as well as oppressive anti-bullying laws, "anti-discrimination" laws, and other tactics.
However, their bigger goal is worldwide. At the end of their complaint against Lively the plaintiffs declare what they are asking for. Included is: "a declaratory judgment holding that Defendant's conduct was in violation of the law of nations." And a preponderance of the arguments in the complaint clearly lead in that direction. Thus, it's clear that their real goal is much bigger than just punishing Scott Lively.
This case could essentially make Uganda the Nuremburg of the gay rights movement. They are seeking an official declaration from a United States Federal Court that "homophobic" speech and writings constitute international crimes against humanity because of the "climate of terror" that they would cause in a country.
This would have huge value to them. It's one thing for Barack Obama to go to other countries and chastise them about their laws and customs reflecting traditional values regarding homosexuality. But it's another to have the club of "crimes against humanity" behind it.
This case represents the declaration of a new global standard. The entire world would be put on notice that all disapproval of homosexuality must be ended. You can't criminalize homosexuality in your country anymore, or even have laws curtailing it in any way -- because that would be considered on the level of the Nazis' actions against the Jews.
And it would certainly be used against any number of individuals and groups here in America and around the world. That's the real problem. That's why they're putting so much effort into it. It's the opportunity they've been waiting for.
Pastor Scott Lively and his legal team outside the courthouse. From left: Horatio Mihet, Pastor Lively, Steve Crampton, Philip Moran
The plaintiffs appear to be moving as quickly as they can to start the "discovery" phase of the lawsuit in Springfield Federal District Court. Basically, the plaintiffs will demand to see tons of Lively's emails, records, and other material -- largely a fishing expedition, it would appear, to find anything that might strengthen their case. As usual, we will keep you informed.
A final note: We have been critical of pro-family legal defense efforts in important, high-profile cases over the years. Much of it has been terribly weak and simply second-rate. Not so with Liberty Counsel. In this case they have really impressed us. They've done a first-rate job and fought brilliantly. Unfortunately, they're just up against a completely corrupt and irrational legal system on a scale that resembles something out of the old Soviet Union. This is a disgrace. In our opinion, Judge Ponsor should be impeached and disbarred. But Lively's legal team is not giving up, and we're behind them.
Wednesday, August 21, 2013
• Growing Conservative Hysteria On Social Media
Here is an exchange with a 'conservative' (I believe more like an anarchist) on Tea Party Community, on the topic of America being a supposed 'police state'. My guess is that those who believe such nonsense have never experienced a true police state. Conservatism is becoming dangerously irrational lately. This will lead to another election loss if we're not careful. But in any case, here you go.
David F
[To Jimmy Z] The "POLICE" don't PREVENT Robberies, Rapes, Murders, Burglaries, Mob Attacks, Child Molestation, Domestic Violence, or even Drinking & Driving ...
They "SHOW UP", AFTER THE FACT, to "collect evidence", process the crime scene, ARREST homeowners, if they DEFEND THEMSELVES, especially with a FIREARM, INTERROGATE EVERYONE in the house, hoping to "pin something on somebody", etc, etc, etc.
They are more like "Garbage-Men", than "Protectors", because they show up AFTER the CRIME has OCCURRED, to "CLEAN UP THE MESS" !!!
Most of them MAY be "GOOD COPS", but there are MORE THAN ENOUGH "BAD COPS" to DESTROY any "CREDIBILITY" the rest of them may have.
The "actions of a few" have cause me to NEVER "trust the many" !
BTW - Too bad the "bad cops" don't visit YOU ... TROLL !!!
Jimmy Z
David F
Well, Jimmy, put the events in order:
(1) Door gets kicked in, without warning.
(2) 8 rounds of 00 Buck go off in 2-3 seconds
(3) Surviving "intruders" realize they have the "wrong house"
(4) If I'm lucky, I get to leave this place for an eternity in Heaven.
(5) The "Garbage Men" clean up the mess.
(6) Who "won" ???
Chuck
David F
[To Jimmy Z] The "POLICE" don't PREVENT Robberies, Rapes, Murders, Burglaries, Mob Attacks, Child Molestation, Domestic Violence, or even Drinking & Driving ...
They "SHOW UP", AFTER THE FACT, to "collect evidence", process the crime scene, ARREST homeowners, if they DEFEND THEMSELVES, especially with a FIREARM, INTERROGATE EVERYONE in the house, hoping to "pin something on somebody", etc, etc, etc.
They are more like "Garbage-Men", than "Protectors", because they show up AFTER the CRIME has OCCURRED, to "CLEAN UP THE MESS" !!!
Most of them MAY be "GOOD COPS", but there are MORE THAN ENOUGH "BAD COPS" to DESTROY any "CREDIBILITY" the rest of them may have.
The "actions of a few" have cause me to NEVER "trust the many" !
BTW - Too bad the "bad cops" don't visit YOU ... TROLL !!!
Jimmy Z
Geez
David, this is the kind of hysterical anti-police rant I'm talking
about. The police prevent enormous amounts of crime just by being on
patrol! 'Garbage men' indeed. God forbid you would ever need a police
officer.
David F
I have no "need" for cops to "protect" me ... Come kick in my door sometime !!!
David F
Well, Jimmy, put the events in order:
(1) Door gets kicked in, without warning.
(2) 8 rounds of 00 Buck go off in 2-3 seconds
(3) Surviving "intruders" realize they have the "wrong house"
(4) If I'm lucky, I get to leave this place for an eternity in Heaven.
(5) The "Garbage Men" clean up the mess.
(6) Who "won" ???
Chuck
What
happens next? Simple. 40 cal bullets come my way and 30-06 bullets go
their way. See, anybody can bust in a door and yell "police". If it
were really so simple, every robber would just do the same thing.
David
F's list above is insane. I think the police with their gear come out better, and you die, and your family is left without you. What's the point? He think that it goes from 8 rounds of buckshot to
police 'realizing they have the wrong house'. Not likely. What happens
most likely is that David ends up shot by police. I take no pleasure in
saying so, but this is craziness here, this idea that one should shoot
it out with the police. Oy vey.
Tuesday, August 20, 2013
• Class Action Lawsuit Against Obama and the NSA
|
||
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)









