Friday, October 23, 2015

Do you want to know the truth? The Left it can effectively attack, wound, marginalize, demonize, and criminalize its greatest enemy: the Christian religion.

Equality Act creates 'LGBT rights' – everywhere!
Plan would even gut Religious Freedom Restoration Act, take agenda into churches
So the Supreme Court has established “same-sex marriage,” and that will quiet the LGBT crowd, because, after all, they got what they wanted, right?
Not even close.
How about protections for LGBT people in jobs, jury duty, credit applications, housing, facilities that provide exhibitions, facilities that provide recreation, facilities that provide exercise, facilities that provide amusement and even facilities that provide “gatherings”?
Already, there’s a bill in Congress to do all those things and much more.
It even would gut the 1993 federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act so LGBT-based discrimination complaints could be brought against churches that follow the Bible, which teaches homosexual behavior is a sin.
The “Equality Act” would amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 “to include sex, sexual orientation and gender identity among the prohibited categories of discrimination or segregation in places of public accommodation.”
It would unilaterally change public school desegregation standards “to provide for the assignment of students without regard to sexual orientation or gender identity.”
Churches that hold to biblical beliefs about sexuality would not be immune, according to Paul Kengor, whose book “Takedown: From Communists to Progressives, How the Left Has Sabotaged Family and Marriage” addresses the problem.
He shows how, beginning with Karl Marx and continuing with Margaret Sanger, Wilhelm Reich, Herbert Marcuse and assorted ’60s radicals, formerly fringe concepts have been accepted. And they’re being used by leftists to attack traditional marriage.
“I think we’re already seeing what’s next from the ‘LGBT’ and same-sex-marriage movement – that is, an aggressive and uncompromising push for forced acceptance, forced compliance, and forced acquiescence,” he said. “For these people, ‘tolerance’ doesn’t actually mean ‘tolerance,’ just as ‘diversity’ doesn’t actually mean ‘diversity.’ What they want is a very selective tolerance and very selective diversity, which, of course, isn’t actually real tolerance or real diversity.
Kengor said they support what Marcuse called “repressive tolerance.”
“They are going to coerce those who disagree with their movement and their agenda, and that will include an aggressive attempt to force religious believers into full compliance with their movement and their agenda,” he said.
“For that, they will enlist the long arm of the state, and they will seek to do so with liberal politicians as their handmaidens. The force will take the form of fines, pickets, boycotts, demonization and, in some cases, incarceration,” said Kengor
In Kentucky, a county clerk, Kim Davis, already was put in jail for nearly a week for refusing an order from U.S. District Judge David Bunning to violate her faith and issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Activists obtained their marriage licenses from her deputies, under a judge’s order, while she was in jail, and now they’re taking her to court again demanding she reissue the licenses with her name on them.
At a recent event in Chicago hosted by the “gay”-rights group Human Rights Campaign, LGBT leaders discussed their agenda, according to a report from Windy City Media Group.
One aim is passing the Equality Act.
HRC President Chad Griffing predicted it would be “the biggest legislative battle in the history of our movement.”
And he claimed the movement has the strength “to decide elections,” with its “10 million” voters.
He also charged that Rep. Dan Lipinski, D-Ill., was attacking families with his plan for the First Amendment Defense Act, which would protect people and groups from unwarranted attacks and lawsuits when their actions are based on their religious beliefs about marriage.
The Equality Act, sponsored by Rep. David, Cicilline, D-R.I., has been referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice, and there’s no immediate time frame for acting.
It guts the protections written into the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act, declaring that beliefs cannot provide a claim, defense or basis against the progressive agenda of the LGBT special interests.
Violators would answer to the U.S. Department of Justice, which would act if it receives a complaint from someone who claims to suffer discrimination.
Further, it would require employers to “recognize individuals in accordance with their gender identity if sex is a bona fide occupational qualification.”
For example, a female could monitor a boys locker room if she identifies as a male.
Michael Brown, author of “Outlasting the Gay Revolution,” said the ultimate objective will be to “uproot” all opposition to LGBT activism.
“That means that churches will become targets, putting Christian denominations, organizations, schools and individuals under increasing pressure to affirm homosexuality or else lose their tax exemption or more,” he said. “It means an attack on all efforts to help those with unwanted homosexual attractions or gender identity issues, with a nationwide attack to ban any treatments for those struggling. It means the complete normalization of transgender identity, imposing this on the rest of society.”
Brown said tolerance and acceptance of homosexuality will not be enough.
“There must be celebration and support, and in the business world, failure to be on the front lines of promoting the LGBT cause will have serious negative consequences,” he said. “And in the schools, there must be complete uniformity in celebrating and promoting LGBT issues.”
His book cites the opposition that already have developed for not cheering the same-sex agenda.
The principles needed to outlast the progressive revolution, he said, are: Never compromise your convictions, take the high moral ground, cherish sexual purity, defend natural marriage, celebrate gender distinctions, propagate the truth, turn to God and refuse to throw in the towel.
He said that while it looks like American society never will be the same, the homosexual activists have not written the end of the story.
He believes Americans will start rejecting the bullying tactics against freedoms of religion, speech and conscience.
The progressive ThinkProgress writes that the proposed law would add protections for LGBT people in employment, housing, public accommodations (including transgender people’s access to the sex-segregated facility that “matches their gender identity”), public education, federal funding, credit, juries and more.
The website says “religious exemptions would be maintained,” but it acknowledges RFRA “cannot be invoked in an attempt to justify discrimination that would otherwise be covered.”
More than a dozen senators and nearly 100 House members, all Democrats, have signed on as co-sponsors.
The Daily Signal was blunt in its report on the bill, noting it “does not protect equality before the law, but unnecessarily and unjustly violates freedom by creating special privileges based on sexual orientation and gender identity.”
Such provisions, the commentary said, “threaten small-business owners with liability for alleged ‘discrimination’ based not on objective traits, but on subjective and unverifiable identities.”
“They expand state interference in labor markets, potentially discouraging job creation. They endanger religious liberty and freedom of speech. And they mandate employment policies that, with regard to many workplace conditions, violate common sense.”
Author David Kupelian, in his just-released “The Snapping of the American Mind,” wrote, “Many thought same-sex marriage would be the crowning achievement of the LGBT movement and that the juggernaut would finally wind down.
“But then, suddenly the focus shifted to ‘transgender rights,’ with Time magazine’s ‘The Transgender Tipping Point’ issue trumpeting the headline, ‘America’s next civil rights frontier,’ and Vice President Joe Biden likewise proclaiming transgender discrimination ‘the civil right issue of our time.’
“And then – brace yourself – there were reports of three-year-old children being required to sign a contract promising they will not use ‘transphobic language’ in nursery school!”
His warning: “The secret of this never-ending, always-expanding revolutionary movement, in case you haven’t realized, is that it has the full support of the Far Left. Not because the Left loves homosexuals, bisexuals, and transsexuals for themselves, but because finally the Left has found its spear tip, with which – as it has dreamed of doing for decades – it can effectively attack, wound, marginalize, demonize, and criminalize its greatest enemy: the Christian religion.”
See original post here

Does America have 'racist' courts? Sure do, Obama is a friend of one! (We always knew he was a racist...this just proves it beyond a reasonable doubt.)

Obama Administration Defends Hawaiian Separatism in Federal Court
Courtesy of Storm'n Norm'n
This column by ACRU Policy Board member J. Christian Adams was published October 22, 2015 by PJ Media.
On Friday, a federal judge in Hawaii will rule whether a racially discriminatory election that only allows one race to participate may take place in November. The Obama administration filed a brief as a friend of the court saying that the racially discriminatory election should take place.
Hawaii passed a law to empower the “native Hawaiian” movement by establishing a government-run voter registration roll that only allows “native Hawaiians” to register to vote. The law’s purpose “is to provide for and to implement the recognition of the native Hawaiian people by means and methods that will facilitate their self-governance.”
The law allows for an election to select delegates to a convention, which would then draft the “governance documents” of a native Hawaiian entity. The “roll of qualified Native Hawaiians” will result in “a convention of qualified native Hawaiians, established for the purpose of organizing themselves.”
The authors of the law seem to have never heard of Appomattox.
The election of delegates to the convention is set to take place next month unless federal district court judge J. Michael Seabright blocks the racially exclusionary election on Friday. Judicial Watch has sought to block the election.
Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, said “the Constitution still applies to the the State of Hawaii. It is shameful that it has taken a federal lawsuit to remind both Hawaiian officials and the Obama administration about the rule of the law.”
The native Hawaiian separatist movement relies on the familiar narrative that the establishment of Hawaii as a state is illegitimate. After all, American corporate interests overthrew Queen Liliuokalani in 1893, and imperialism wiped out legitimate Hawaiian self-governance, or so the story goes.
Similar separatist efforts are underway in Guam.
Instead of opposing racial classifications and racial division, the Obama administration is doing what it does best: taking sides against American traditions of equality and unity.
In a brief filed by the Department of the Interior, the Obama administration squarely takes the side of the racial classifications and those defending the separatist election.
The Obama administration characterizes the nativist movement in Hawaii as akin to an Indian tribe recognized as such by Congress, which it isn’t.
As explained below, in accordance with Federal law, tribes in the continental United States routinely limit voting in tribal elections, including constitutional referenda, to members, while excluding non-Natives. There is no principled basis for treating the Native Hawaiian community differently.
No principled basis? Here’s a start: Congress never passed a law to treat native Hawaiians like an Indian tribe like that pesky Constitution requires. Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 clearly gives Congress alone the power to answer questions related to the status of an Indian tribe. Congress has repeatedly rejected efforts to treat native Hawaiians like good old fashioned stateside Indians.
Only in the Obama administration would a lawyer file a pleading with a court saying there is “no principled basis” when the Constitution itself provides a principled basis.
But the Obama lawyers go even further and have no gripe with the racially exclusionary elections. Why should they? After all, this is a gang that’s regularly on the wrong side of questions of racial equality. They’ve even drafted rules to give validity to the racially exclusionary election. The brief:
The proposed rule places few conditions on the drafting of a governing document that might be presented to the Department in the process of reestablishing a government-to-government relationship, merely stating that the governing document should be “based on meaningful input from representative segments of the Native Hawaiian community and reflect the will of [that] community.”
This is a question for Congress to decide, not a small band of lawyer-activists inside the Obama administration who enable a racial separatist movement in Hawaii. We’ll see Friday if the racially exclusionary election is allowed to take place.

Tuesday, October 20, 2015

Sending the wrong message...psst, How many Liberals will admit it?

Video portion from Facebook

Megyn Kelly and Kevin Jackson on this stupid School Principle who held back the student council election because too...
Posted by Ray Felitto III on Tuesday, October 20, 2015

Commentary from:
School Principal Withheld Student Council Election Results Because Winners Weren’t Diverse Enough
In a democracy, the people get the government they deserve. But Everett Middle School in San Francisco is not exactly a democracy, and Principal Lena Van Haren withheld publication of the results of a student council election because she didn’t like the outcome—too many of the winners were white.
The school is roughly 80 percent students of color, but the election results didn’t reflect the school’s diversity, according to KTVU:
“That is concerning to me because as principal I want to make sure all voices are heard from all backgrounds,” Van Haren said….
“We’re not nullifying the election, we’re not cancelling the election and we’re not saying this didn’t count,” Van Haren said.
She said the school may possibly add positions in an effort to be more equal.
“I’m very hopeful this can be a learning experience and actually be something that embodied our vision which is to help students make positive change,” she added.
But an election is already a learning experience—or would be, if administrators didn’t hide the results. Teaching kids that authority figures always know better—and will even re-jigger the outcome of a democratic election if they don’t like the people the students picked—not only sends the wrong message, it’s blatantly unfair.
It’s also possibly illegal, according to The Washington Post’s Eugene Volokh:
I’m inclined to say, by the way, that attempting to “add positions in an effort to be more equal” by (presumably) filling them with children of a particular race would likely violate the Equal Protection Clause and federal civil rights law. And even if one can somehow argue that such an action is “narrowly tailored to a compelling government interest” in supposed “diversity,” it violates the California Constitution’s categorical ban on “discriminat[ing] against, or grant[ing] preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race … in the operation of … public education.”
Roundly (and rightly) criticized for presuming to correct the student’s election choices, Van Haren backed off, releasing the following statement:
Everett Middle School is honoring the results of the Associated Student Body (ASB) elections. This is our first student council at Everett Middle School in recent history and we started up a student council because we want our students to have several ways to develop their leadership skills and be a part of shaping our school. We want a student leadership body that includes the range of perspectives and experiences of our students and we believe a representative body is an important part of democracy.
When we reviewed the results of our Associated Student Body (ASB) elections on Friday, October 9th, we saw that it was not fully representative of our school population. I made the decision to pause on sharing the results with the students in order to capitalize on a teachable moment. I wanted to have a conversation with all of the candidates and ask for their ideas to make sure that all voices and groups are represented in our ASB. In retrospect, I understand how this decision to pause created concerns. Today I visited classrooms to announce the winners of the elections.
I happen to think student governments are often silly organizations that reward students with very little actual power while teaching them to adore political life. But if a school is going to have an election at all, it really ought to honor the wishes of the voters.

Sunday, October 18, 2015

All In A Day's Work...more about guns

There is no question that motor vehicles kill more people than do guns...  For the year 2013,  32,719 people died resulting from motor vehicles whereas 11,208 people were counted as homicides by firearms.  Many, if not most, motor vehicle deaths are described as accidents and to a much lessor degree, deaths by firearms are rarely called accidental.  In either case the weapon, whether it be the gun or the vehicle, was not responsible for any of the deaths.  The one held responsible is the person who operates the vehicle or the one pulling the trigger.  So why is that some politicians and the mainstream media (MSM) want to confiscate all guns and not all motor vehicles?  And why are the penalties for using a firearm to commit a homicide so much more severe than one who uses a vehicle when the results are the same; dead is dead by any other name.  These questions and more could take up more space than I care to comment at the moment but suffice it to say, the vast majority of the evidence as to why certain politicians (and their currently controlled media) want to confiscate guns is the power they wish to have over the unarmed populace is much easier to control than one who might want to fight back when politicians become to oppressive.  I don't want to get into a history lesson here but history does tell us that all regimes that attain power, especially dictatorial power, have done so by taking away the weapons that may be used against them.  In the meantime if you really wanted to do something about the quest for power that some of these politicians have, take away their driving privileges the next time there's a motor vehicle homicide in your town (Why not?  They want to take away your guns whenever there's a homicide facilitated by the use of a firearm.)
In the news clippings below you'll find several crimes committed with the use of a firearm; all of them in Chicago, (all in the same day) America's Murder Capital, yet Obama and the people he surrounds himself with (i.e. Mayor Rahm Emanuel et. al) cannot and will not do anything to prevent such crimes.  They'll just let them continue until they have enough people convinced that the 2nd Amendment to our Constitution needs repealing.  ~ Norman E. Hooben

All (except the follow-on commentary) of the following by The Chicago Sun Times

1.  Man, 22, shot in leg in Washington Park
Written By Sun-Times Wire Posted: 10/17/2015, 09:35pm
A 22-year-old man was shot in a leg in around 9 p.m. Saturday in the 100 block of East 53rd Street in Washington Park.  The police said he was hospitalized but didn’t immediately have more information.

23-year-old boy shot in the head in Humboldt Park
Written By Mitchell Armentrout Posted: 10/17/2015, 11:37pm
A 3-year-old boy was shot in the head and critically wounded Saturday night in Humboldt Park on the West Side. The shooting happened around 9 p.m. in the 1000 block of North Francisco, according to the police.
A police source said the shooting might have been accidental.
Family members took the boy to Norwegian American Hospital. He was then transferred to Mount Sinai Hospital in critical condition, police and fire officials said.

3. Man, 35, shot in the head in Woodlawn
Written by Sun-Times Wire posted: 10/17/2015, 09:44pm
A 35-year-old man was shot in the head Saturday night in the Woodlawn neighborhood on the South Side.  The man was sitting in a car in the 6100 block of South Ellis at 8:42 p.m., when a light colored car drove by and someone inside the car shot at the man, police said.
He was shot in the head, and was taken to Stroger Hospital where his condition was stabilized, police said.  A police source said the man is a documented gang member.

4Man shot after being robbed in East Garfield Park
Written By Sun-Times Wire Posted: 10/17/2015, 09:40pm
A man was shot after he was robbed Saturday night in the East Garfield Park neighborhood.
The 26-year-old man was shot after two people robbed him at about 8:45 p.m. in the 100 block of South Homan. The robbers took an unknown amount of cash and ran away, police said.  The man suffered a gunshot wound to the leg, and was taken to Mount Sinai Hospital where his condition was stabilized.

5.  Man charged after son finds gun, fatally shoots 3-year-old brother
Written By Sun-Times Staff Posted: 10/17/2015, 11:37pm        
A father was arrested after his 6-year-old son found a loaded gun and accidentally shot his 3-year-old brother in the head Saturday night in their Humboldt Park neighborhood home on the West Side Michael Santiago, 25, has been charged with one felony count of child endangerment causing death, according to a statement from Chicago Police.
Santiago stored the loaded gun on top of a refrigerator in their home in the 1000 block of North Francisco, police said.
His sons were playing cops and robbers at 9:05 p.m. Saturday when the older boy saw the gun, grabbed it and accidentally shot his younger brother, 3-year-old Eian H. Santiago, in the head, according to police and the Cook County medical examiner’s office.
A family member carried Eian to Norwegian American Hospital. The boy was later transferred to Mount Sinai Hospital, where Eian was pronounced dead at 11:48 p.m., authorities said. More than a dozen people gathered outside Sinai early Sunday, crying and hugging, as they waited to hear news of the boy’s condition.
Santiago is a former gang member and got the gun from another gang member, Chicago Police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said. Santiago had the gun in the home for protection, but it was not legally registered.
The Chicago Anti-Gun Enforcement unit is looking into the history of the gun and additional charges may be filed against Santiago, Guglielmi said.  Santiago was ordered held on a $75,000 bond in court Sunday.
More like this here...
Guns are not our problem!
Kenneth Harper
Georgia Law Enforcement Officer
Written in response to a Baysides news article
A mechanic uses "tools" for his/her trade. Many have killed with those "wrenches, screwdrivers, pipes, tools.
A secretary uses "tools" for his/her trade. Many have killed with those "letter openers, staplers, pens, tools.
A carpenter uses "tools" for his/her trade. Many have killed with those "hammers, knives, nail guns, you know "tools".
One of these days we will wake up and see that the tools of a trade are not our problem. We will eventually see that society is the problem in itself. Instead of asking how children are getting guns, ask why? What is driving our children to turn to guns? Why are they using these guns now, when 20 years ago, they were even more available and not used near as often. One of many answers is the fact that parents put their children in front of 3 to 9 hundred acts of violence per day. This includes national TV, video games, movie theaters, etc. We have learned over the past 25 years that violence is natural. To shoot and kill is "fun." We have desensitized children from feeling remorse, when it comes to hurting others.
I admit we have a problem in our society. The problem is not guns, but the way we are raising our children. The problem is the fact that everyone wants to help, but no one wants to do it the hard way. The problem is that it's easier to destroy guns overnight, than to teach our children morals over their first 6 years. The problem is legislators pass these "feel good" laws to make people think they are doing something. To make themselves feel like they are earning their money. I believe some honestly think they are helping, but we have to wake up and deal with the real problems. 90% of crimes committed with firearms are carried out by people that "laws" "prevent" from having them.
Here is a perfect example of how our society is: A 13 year old wakes up at 2 in the morning. He is bored, so he takes dads car and picks up 3 friends. They get drunk or drugged up. They go around vandalizing whatever comes into their path. They drink or "smoke" a little more and eventually crash at 5 a.m. It kills 2 of the 4 and the 27 year old mom and her 2 children. This is horrific, but the first questions our society asks are: Where were the police? Where were the parents? What were these boys doing out at this hour? No one says, oh my, look what that car did. No one blames the car. Place a gun in that scenario, instead of the car and what do you have. All the blame turns to the gun. "oh my, look what guns are doing to our society". Where did they get that gun? Guns are no different than they were 100 years ago, but consequences are much different.
Guns are a necessary part of society. We need them to protect ourselves. We need them to ward off criminals. If guns are wiped out, what does the criminal have to fear? If you think that the police will be there exactly when you need them, you are extremely naive. Society has an average of 1 officer to every 20,000 people. In a lot of municipalities, it's much lower than that. Most agencies are only able to respond to an incident after it happens. If some crazed idiot breaks into your house and is intent on killing you, you had better have some form of protection, because your local officer is probably across town handling a false burglar alarm or a complaint about nuclear strikes in Bosnia. Bear arms and protect yourself and loved ones!
Useful links...
1List of punishments for murder in the United States
3Guns vs. Cars Comparison is No Accident
4Attempted Murder Charges and Penalties
5Penalties for Drunk Driving Vehicular Homicide (pdf file)
6BREAKING: Obama Announces Plans to Ban Guns for Elderly and Disabled Americans
7White House Confirms Obama Wants To Ban Guns
8President Obama Shows His True Gun Control Agenda
Note: There is overwhelming evidence that Obama (and Hillary Clinton) wants a total ban on guns...any suggestion that it is only a partial ban is part of the strategy of the entire left leaning Democrat Party...they'll bite off as little as they can until it's a slam dunk.  Everyone needs to brush up on the Saul Alinsky tactics used by these power hungry people who want to fundamentally change America.  Obama uses these tactics successfully...before him it was Bill and Hillary Clinton...only Obama does it better.  Also recall that Hillary Clinton wrote her college thesis on Saul Alinsky... a man she admired and still does.  Saul Alinsky wanted to hire Hillary but she turned him down and she went off to Yale where she met Bill.  And if you don't know it by now, Saul Alinsky hated America.  Due to time and space I'm not going to get into any discussion about the matter here but you can review my post, "What is an Alinskyism"  and if you have any questions please devote a minimum of 11,000 hours of study before you ask... 11,000 hours?  Yeah, that's when I stopped counting. ~ Norm

Approximate Jail or Prison Sentences Possible in Traffic Crash Deaths Caused by a Drunk Driver

(Note: Compare this to prison sentences when a firearm is used in a homicide)

Alabama: 1 to 10 years
Alaska: 1 to 99 years
Arizona: 1 to 22 years
Arkansas: 5 to 20 years
California: 0 to 10 years 
Colorado: 0 to 24 years
Connecticut: 1 to 10 years
Delaware: 1 to 5 years
DC: 0 to 30 years
Florida: 0 to 15 years
Georgia: 0 to 15 years
Hawaii: 0 to 10 years
Idaho: 0 to 15 years
Illinois: 1 to 28 years
Indiana: 2 to 20 years
Iowa: 1 to 25 years
Kansas: 0 to 172 months
Kentucky: 0 to 10 years
Louisiana: 3 to 30 years
Maine: 6 months to 10 years
Maryland: 0 to 5 years
Massachusetts: 30 days to 15 years
Michigan: 0 to 20 years
Minnesota: 0 to 10 years
Mississippi: 5 to 25 years
Missouri: 0 to 15 years
Montana: 0 to 30 years
Nebraska: 1 to 50 years
Nevada: 2 to 25 years
New Hampshire: 0 to 15 years
New Jersey: 5 to 10 years
New Mexico: 0 to 6 years
New York: 0 to 15 years
North Carolina: 15 to 480 months 
North Dakota: 0 to life imprisonment 
Ohio: 1 to 15 years
Oklahoma: 0 to 1 year
Oregon: 0 to 20 years
Pennsylvania: 0 to 10 years
Rhode Island: 5 to 20 years
South Carolina: 1 to 25 years
South Dakota: 0 to 15 years
Tennessee: 8 to 60 years
Texas: 2 to 20 years
Utah: 0 to 15 years
Vermont: 1 to 15 years
Virginia: 1 to 20 years
Washington: 31 to 177 months
West Virginia: 90 days to 10 years
Wisconsin: 0 to 40 years
Wyoming: 0 to 20 years
Is this not an oxymoron?
Hillary Clinton is a terror!