Obama Retaliates Against Africans for U.N. Rebuke
On June 11th, the Continent of Africa delivered a stunning rebuke to President Barack Obama and his “Gay”-puffing U.S. State Department by forcing the election of Ugandan Foreign Minister Sam Kutesa as President of the United Nations General Assembly. “The U.N. General Assembly’s Africa Group nominated the Ugandan foreign minister to serve as president in May of last year,” lamented the LGBT Advocate magazine, “It was the Africa Group’s turn to have the presidency, and no other nominees were considered” (emphasis mine). http://www.advocate.com/world/2014/06/11/ugandas-antigay-foreign-minister-appointed-un-general-assembly-president
In other words, a united Africa chose an unashamed defender of Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Law to represent its values and vision during the U.N.’s 69th presidential term. Kutesa has stated quite reasonably that promotion and legitimization of homosexuality “is wrong for our young people and it offends our culture.”
Just one week later, following Obama’s Fathers Day weekend in Palm Springs with Sodomite Ambassador to Spain James Costos and his partner Michael Smith (the White House decorator),
http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2014/06/obamas-staying-with-gay-couple-in-california-2629506.html ,the State Department struck back.
“The Obama administration on Thursday [June 19th] announced it will ban Ugandan officials responsible for anti-LGBT human rights abuses from entering the U.S.” exulted The Washington Blade. “National Security Council spokesperson Caitlin Hayden said in a statement the State Department is ‘taking measures’ to prevent Ugandan officials ‘involved in serious human rights abuses’ against LGBT people and others from entering the U.S. The White House will also seek travel bans against Ugandans who are ‘found responsible for significant public corruption’ http://www.washingtonblade.com/2014/06/19/u-s-ban-uganda-officials-lgbt-rights-abuses/#sthash.gS09iJO7.dpuf
With the latter clause, Obama has tipped his hand as to how he will dispense with Mr. Kutesa in due time. Note this tidbit from the Advocate article: “As The Advocate reported on Tuesday, Kutesa’s election as General Assembly president comes with lingering corruption charges, some dating back decades and some very recent.” Look for State to publicly shame and discredit Kutesa on ginned-up corruption charges if he gets too vocal against the global LGBT agenda.
This tactic is, of course, standard operating procedure for “gay” activists in power. They typically accuse their target of both “homophobia” (i.e. disapproval of homosexuality) and one or more genuine moral failings such as financial corruption or racism. We saw this most recently in the attacks on Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson. Though his “scandal” was opposing “gay marriage,” the LGBT-controlled media added a phony accusation of racism against Robertson which they began to emphasize in later news coverage after the public rallied to his defense on the “homophobia” charge. http://ideas.time.com/2013/12/20/why-its-ok-to-ignore-phil-robertsons-racism/
While I believe the Ugandan law as written is overly harsh, I have stressed to journalists around the globe that it is typical of African law, which emphasizes deterrence in the letter but is usually lenient in the application. These mostly leftist news outlets have, of course, omitted that observation as not in keeping with their goal of marginalizing Uganda as a “pariah” nation intent on exterminating homosexuals (a thoroughly false charge). They have also failed to report that the “human rights abuses” cited by the U.S. State Department have been adjudicated by Uganda courts, mostly in favor of the victims.
This matter is of special interest to me, as the American pastor being sued by Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG) for “Crimes Against Humanity” for preaching against homosexuality in Uganda, though I have never advocated hatred or violence against homosexuals or supported the Anti-Homosexuality Law as written. http://www.scottlively.net/2012/06/28/my-analysis-of-the-smug-lawsuit/
Still, it is encouraging to see the Africans standing up to the United States and it’s “Babylonian” State Department, which, at least in regards to sexual morality and the LGBT agenda has truly become “The Great Satan” of the world. Following a “Gay Pride” celebration in 2011 at the US Embassy in Islamibad, the Pakistani government condemned US activism as “cultural terrorism.” http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pakistanis-denounce-us-embassys-gay-rights-party-as-cultural-terrorism?utm_source=LifeSiteNews.com+Daily+Newsletter&utm_campaign=a00105a671-LifeSiteNews_com_US_Headlines07_26_2011&utm_medium=email
To be fair, State has been under the control of the LGBT movement since before President Obama took office. I was in Riga, Latvia in 2006 and 2007 to help the Latvian pro-family movement resist EU pressure to allow a “Gay Pride Parade.” We succeeded in 2006, but then in 2007 we failed after the LGBT organizing efforts were joined by LGBT activists at the U.S. Embassy under Ambassador Catherine Todd Bailey of the Bush Administration. The late Pastor Ken “Hutch” Hutcherson and I confronted diplomatic staff about the matter at the Embassy in Riga, but were unsuccessful at stopping the parade.
However, “Gay” power at State had grown by a magnitude of 10 under Obama. Openly homosexual Ambassadors are now being posted around the world http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/02/senate-approves-openly-gay-ambassadors_n_3697310.html And in December of 2011, the Obama Administration declared the advancement of the homosexual agenda a priority of the United States government around the world http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/06/presidential-memorandum-international-initiatives-advance-human-rights-l. Among other things all US agencies abroad were directed to “combat the criminalization by foreign governments of LGBT status or conduct [i.e. sodomy laws] and to expand efforts to combat discrimination, homophobia, and intolerance on the basis of LGBT status or conduct” [i.e Biblical pro-family views], including funding of the “gay” agenda by “Agencies involved with foreign aid, assistance, and development.” See also http://massresistance.org/docs/gen2/12a/obama_memo_120611/
Here’s another recent example http://lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com/2014/06/us-and-european-diplomats-join-gay.html
Under Obama, the United States government has devoted its enormous influence and resources to the advancement of the LGBT “cause” around the world. Yet, the poorest and most politically dependent nations of the world, the countries of Africa, have courageously shown that they will not compromise the fundamental values of Christian civilization. The Africans unanimously rebuked President Obama and that is a hopeful sign for the vast majority of the world’s population who hold family values as legitimate human rights and homosexuality as a social and behavioral wrong.
A Very Tolerant Death Threat
Received in my voicemail:
“Denounce the Uganda Nazi bill or I will hang you and burn you alive, you disgusting Nazi maggot. You’re a Nazi. You’re not a human. You’re a parasitic maggot and if you don’t get the f*** out of this country you will die.”
Here it is in MP3 threattoscott
“GAYS” SMEAR PASTOR LIVELY AND AFA WITH HORRIFIC MURDER HOAX
PRESS RELEASE
For Immediate Release
Contact: Dr. Scott Lively, 413-250-0984
www.defendthefamily.com
www.ScottLively.net
“Gays” Smear Pastor Lively and AFA with Horrific Murder Hoax
Springfield, MA. Pastor Scott Lively of Abiding Truth Ministries and the leaders of American Family Association (AFA) are today demanding a retraction and apology from a Traverse City, Michigan homosexual activist group called TC Equality which has published a horrific photograph on the Internet of an African man being burned to death while a crowd of people including young children look on. TC Equality stated that this photograph depicts the beating, stoning and murder of a Ugandan homosexual man “for being gay” and placed the blame for this murder upon Lively and AFA for “promoting violence against gay and lesbian people around the world.” This photo and message was apparently circulated by email and posted on Facebook, with an urgent plea to “Please share this alarming picture so the world can know.”
However, the gruesome picture was actually taken in the Kibera slums of Kenya and the man in question was an accused mugger and thief killed by a vigilante mob stirred up by his victims. It had nothing to do with homosexuality, Pastor Lively or AFA. Furthermore, the allegation that Pastor Lively and AFA have promoted violence against homosexuals is an absolute fabrication without a shred of truth behind it. http://kevinaloo.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/crime-in-kibera/
“This is the most disgusting piece of libel by the LGBT community that I have ever seen, and I‘ve seen a lot of it” said Lively, who was at one time the California director of AFA. “It is as evil and Satanic as the murder that it misrepresents. What kind of sick minds exploit such a horrific tragedy to implicate innocent people just because they oppose their political agenda?”
Sadly, this in not the first time that the LGBT community has defamed Pastor Lively by accusing him of inciting murder. In early 2011, Ugandan “gay” activist David Kato was beaten to death with a hammer in Kampala by his “gay” lover, Enoch Syudney Nsubuga. However, the global “gay” activist network portrayed the Kato murder as a “homophobic hate crime” inspired by Pastor Lively’s preaching against homosexuality there in 2009. They continued to perpetuate this hateful myth even after Nsubuga, a male prostitute whom Kato had bailed out of jail to be his live-in lover, confessed to the crime and was sentenced to thirty years in prison for it. Kato Murderer Captured
Enoch Sydney Nsubuga
So intent have the “gays” been in smearing Lively with false charges that they filed a federal lawsuit against him in 2012 for “Crimes Against Humanity” based almost entirely on the Kato incident — omitting the truth about Nsubuga even to the federal judge!! And on the day of filing the action, a group of them marched to Pastor Lively’s church in a “funeral procession” carrying a giant black cardboard coffin bearing a large photo of David Kato.
On its website, TC Equality repeats a common refrain among the “gays” that Pastor Lively promoted the death penalty for homosexuals in the Uganda Anti-Homosexuality Law (which was recently passed without that draconian penalty). Again, these are false charges, completely without proof and contradicted by Pastor Lively’s consistent public opposition to that proposed bill and complaint that the Ugandans ignored his advice to focus on prevention and therapy of homosexuality in their laws. http://tcequality.com/
Read Pastor Lively’s Letter to the Ugandan Parliament about the Ugandan Anti-Homosexuality Law and their Reply here: http://www.defendthefamily.com/pfrc/newsarchives.php?id=3261726
Ironically, Pastor Lively lives a life that would likely be lauded by the political left if he were not an opponent of the “gay” agenda. His inner-city mission church serves many of the most disadvantaged people of Springfield Massachusetts and his congregation may be the most racially diverse and harmonious in the city. He describes the church as a “welcoming and transforming” congregation in which everyone, including homosexuals, are welcome to attend, and he once took in a formerly homosexual man into his home where he and his wife and four children nursed him though the final year of his struggle with AIDS.
“I care deeply for those who are afflicted with a homosexual disorder,” said Lively, “even those who hate and revile me. Hollywood and the popular culture paint these sexual anarchists as enlightened and benevolent pillars of society but the Bible warns in Romans 1:29 that they are in fact malicious deceivers. I know from personal experience that this is true. However, I am instructed by my Lord to love even those who spitefully abuse me with abhorrent lies. Jesus said they would hate me because they first hated Him. I do my best to love them by telling them the truth, even as they bear false witness against me.”
The LGBT character assassination of Pastor Lively began almost a quarter century ago when he first received his ministry to defend Biblical family values in society. While serving as the Communications Director of Oregon Citizens alliance (a Christian political group) during an anti-homosexuality ballot measure campaign in 1991-1992, the “gays” painted OCA as “Nazis” bent on exterminating homosexuals. At the height of Ballot Measure 9 a lesbian journalist who had been gently but firmly expelled by Lively from a private campaign meeting sued him and OCA for “battery,” falsely claiming she had been assaulted in the process. Although the police and DA saw through her false accusations and refused to bring criminal charges, she then brought and won a civil lawsuit, which the politically corrupt local court system assigned to a special pro-tem “judge” who was actually a corporate lawyer for NIKE, a major opponent of Ballot Measure 9.
Rather than abandoning the work to which the Lord had assigned him, Pastor Lively then wrote his first book The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party (with Orthodox Jewish researcher Kevin E. Abrams). The Pink Swastika successfully challenged the then -national effort by the LGBT movement to fabricate a “Gay Holocaust” under the Nazis, built in part on “gay” propaganda efforts during Measure 9. In response to their anti-revisionist scholarship, Lively and Abrams have ever since been misrepresented by the LBGT activists and their media allies as “Holocaust Revisionists,” and Lively was added to the Southern Poverty Law Center’s list of “hate” groups.
In consequence of the lesbian lawsuit, Pastor Lively went to law school in 1995 where he earned a degree of Juris Doctor of Law, Magna Cum Laude, and established Abiding Truth Ministries, and its subsidiary Defend the Family International, to teach Christians around the world how to effectively oppose the “gay” agenda. LGBT efforts to discredit him have escalated over the years in proportion to his influence, culminating in their current hysterical efforts to paint Pastor Lively as a Hitlerian-style monster orchestrating a global campaign of murder and “Crimes Against Humanity.”
“It’s really astonishing to see the lengths these radicals have gone,” said Lively. “I’m just a sinner saved by grace, delivered out of bondage to drugs and alcohol addiction in 1986 and given a simple truth-telling ministry. ATM is my one-man, part-time ministry in a tiny 10’ x 12’ office in my home, doing nothing but expose the true history and political agenda of the LGBT movement in an attitude of ’tough love.’ The thing that sets me apart, I guess, is that I don’t compromise my Biblical world view and I refuse to be intimidated by the “gay” bullies. For that, I’ve become the new Hitler in their propaganda. It is surreal. But as the Scripture says in 1 Corinthians 1:27 “God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty.”
Russian Retaliation Apparently Links LGBT Agenda to Ukraine Dispute
Friends,
This article in the Daily Beast (which we have linked as our lead story at Defend the Family) “Putin Imposes Secret Sanctions on Pro-Gay Obama Campaign Donors” notes that “a focus was put on those with ties to the gay and lesbian community; it’s a reflection of the ongoing fight between the Kremlin and the White House over Russia’s laws punishing the promotion of LGBT ‘propaganda.'”
After pointing out that the US 2nd round of sanctions curiously bore no relation to Ukraine, Russia’s own list emphasized pro-homosexual associates of President Obama. Since the Russians believe the sanctions should bear a relation to the Ukraine, it appears that their list connects the dispute over the homosexual agenda with the Ukrainian stand-off.
I personally think Obama’s motives and timing in the Ukrainian coup (and subsequent push for war) are influenced at least in part by Putin’s unequivocal stand against homosexual perversion.
In my Open Letter to President Vladimir Putin http://www.scottlively.net/2013/08/30/an-open-letter-to-president-vladimir-putin/ I wrote
“As a long-time leader in the pro-family movement who toured your country in 2006 and 2007 advocating the very policy you have enacted, I want to caution you not to assume that you have fully solved the problem by the enactment of this law. The battle to protect your society from homosexualization has only just begun, and you may be surprised to discover in the coming months and years just how aggressively many world leaders will work to try to intimidate and coerce you to capitulate to homosexualist demands.
Few political agendas in the history of mankind have marshaled the tenacity and resolve of the homosexualist movement. Its activists are driven by an implacable militancy and a zeal to advance their own self-serving interests that rivals even the most fanatical religious cults. A glimpse at the spirit behind the movement can be seen in the Bible in Genesis 19:4-11.
In just fifty years this marginal group representing only about 2% of the population has, through sheer will-power and intimidation, gained more political influence in the legislatures and courtrooms of the western world than the Christian church. The sexual conduct that defines their identity as individuals and as a movement was almost universally illegal and unlawful during the years our two nations were allied against the threat of Nazism, but just a little more than half a century later homosexualist leaders and surrogates sit in a majority of the seats of power across the west, and increasing in the east and in developing nations as well.
In readying your society to recognize and counter the efforts of the militant gay movement it is important to understand that their propaganda and policies adhere invariably to the narrative that all disapproval of homosexuality leads inevitably to hatred, violence and murder of homosexuals. All of the pro-homosexual policies in the United States and Europe rest on this unstated and unchallenged but fictional premise. Thus, the homosexualist movement is not simply seeking social tolerance, or acceptance, but political power and control. They want the power to stamp out all disapproval of homosexuality in your society and to compel every citizen (especially the youth) to embrace the view that homosexual conduct is good and normal.
They ask for a place at the table, but once they have one all the social ideals they exploited to get there, such as social tolerance, freedom of speech, and respect for cultural diversity, are discarded. In place of those ideals is inserted a new backwards and upside-down morality and world-view that condemns all disapproval of homosexuality as a new fictionalized form of bigotry. I have termed this phenomenon “Homo-fascism” and defined it as a form of extreme left-wing, regressive radicalism which seeks to establish rigid authoritarian controls over all public discourse and government policies regarding sexual norms and proprieties, and to enact punitive measures against conscientious objectors that would punish or suppress all disapproval of homosexuality and related sexual behaviors (that would of course even though they deny it, quickly include a sexual indoctrination and exploitation of children).
In the coming months and years Russia and Her people will be increasingly portrayed by emotion laden and abusive hyperbole as bigoted haters, intent on exterminating homosexuals. Indeed, the propaganda campaign on that theme has already been initiated , with video footage purporting to show Russian neo-Nazis beating homosexuals now being circulated on the Internet, along with the false implication that this is the intent of your policy.”
When the US and EU sponsored Ukraine coup occurred, following the Ukrainian government’s refusal to move closer to the EU, I pointed out that a significant factor for the Ukrainians was probably the LGBT agenda of the EU vs the pro-family agenda of the Russian Federation.
I think today’s story provides a slight boost to my hypothesis.
I caution US conservatives not to fall into line with Obama against the Russians. There is far more to this crisis than the war-propaganda and spin of the western media (including some conservative outlets) would have us believe. I for one will not take sides with the New World Order crowd against the only world power that is standing up to the LGBT agenda and embracing Biblical values on family issues. At least not over a geo-political crisis in which (IMHO) the Russians are clearly in the right.
Blessings,
Dr. Scott Lively
Pink Brick Award
Tonight I was informed by a writer at the Bay Area Reporter that I have been “awarded” the Pink Brick Award by the San Francisco LGBT Pride organization.
From their website: “The Pink Brick is a symbol of the first brick hurled at the Stonewall Riots in 1969. This faux award is an opportunity to highlight an individual or organization that has done significant harm to the LGBT community. It is also an opportunity to educate the community and the Pink Brick recipient about relevant issues.” http://www.sfpride.org/pink-brick/
Here is his email and my response:
Hi,
As I said on the phone, you’ve been chosen to receive the Pink Brick award from the San Francisco LGBT Pride organization.
Each year, this award goes to someone who’s hurt the LGBT community.
Here are the questions I have for you for my story:
What’s your reaction to receiving this award?
Will you come to San Francisco to pick it up in person?
What’s your age? What’s your city/state of residence?
If you could email me today, that would be ideal. My final deadline is tomorrow (Tuesday) at 4 Pacific time.
Thanks, Seth
Seth Hemmelgarn
Bay Area Reporter
Office: 415-359-2627
Fax: 415-861-8144
seth@ebar.com
www.ebar.com
Here is my response:
The pink brick, symbolic of the bricks thrown by militant “gays” at police during the Stonewall riots, perfectly captures the irony of bullies posing as victims. I’ve actually already received this award in real life. A pink paving stone scrawled with the threat “SHUT DOWN LIVELY” was thrown through the church windows of Christian Liberty Academy the morning I was to give a speech on “gay” bullying there in 2011. It was wrapped in a note threatening further violence. The worst bullies in America today are LGBT activists and I will not stop telling that truth no matter how many bricks you throw at me. I dare you to publish this comment and accompanying pictures.
For more on this incident see Peter LaBarbera’s write-up on it. The event in question was a banquet sponsored by his organization, Americans for Truth About Homosexuality. http://americansfortruth.com/2011/10/15/breaking-brick-throwing-vandals-attack-aftah-banquet-host-christian-liberty-academy/
FYI, here is a bit of text from The Pink Swastika referencing the Stonewall Riot and its pedophile connection:
Although many contemporary homosexual activists, especially lesbians, attempt to distance themselves from their pederastic comrades, the fact remains that pederasts (as was true in Germany) have always been at the forefront of the [LGBT] movement, albeit often “in the closet.” And the “right” of adults to have sex with children has always been a basic goal of the movement. In February of 1972, for example, a national coalition of homosexual groups met in Chicago to draw up a list of priorities for the movement. Prominent on the list was the demand for “a repeal of all laws governing the age of sexual consent” (Rueda:201ff).
The organizations dedicated specifically to “pedophile rights” or “pederast-rights” in the United States are made up of homosexual men (Rueda:173ff), and in major cities with an active homosexual community “gay” bookstores carry numerous titles which endorse man/boy sex (Grant, 1993:22). Tom Reeves, a self-admitted pederast who was part of the early “gay rights” movement, is one of a number of writers in an anthology called Varieties of Man/Boy Love. He explains the role of pederasts in homosexualist activism:
“Almost every one of the early openly homosexual writers was a pederast. Pederasty was a constant theme of early gay literature, art, and pornography. The Stonewall riots were precipitated by an incident involving an underage drag queen, yet that detail was not viewed as significant. Curtis Price, a fourteen-year-old, self-described “radical hustler,” formed the first gay liberation organization in Baltimore. Many of the leaders of early gay liberation and the founders of the major gay groups in the U.S. were boy-lovers” (Reeves in Pascal:47).
Another of the early leaders of the “gay rights” movement was David Thorstad, also a self-identified pederast. Thorstad was president of the Gay Activist Alliance (Stop Promoting Homosexuality Hawaii Newsletter, November, 1994:6), one of the largest of the groups which formed in New York in the wake of the Stonewall riot. The GAA invented “the strategy of ‘zapping’ politicians,” writes Marotta, “that would later become [its] trademark…[they] had learned that homosexuals could infiltrate political gatherings and make themselves heard through sheer brashness” (Marotta:137). The GAA also developed the strategy of using these “carefully staged confrontations” to force politicians to enact “anti-discrimination” policies (ibid.:150). The GAA reorganized early in 1974 as the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (Adam:88).
Thorstad, along with Reeves and others, later went on to form the North American Man/Boy Love Association in Boston in 1978 (NAMBLA Bulletin, September, 1992:2). NAMBLA, which is the largest “pederast rights” organization in the country, cloaks its agenda in rhetoric about concern for the rights of children to have “sexual freedom.” (Pascal:49). In recent years NAMBLA has come under attack by some elements of the “gay rights” alliance, who have tried to exclude the group from some of the higher profile media events. But this has evoked a violent response from its defenders. When NAMBLA was denied a role in the 1986 Los Angeles “Gay Pride Parade,” marcher Harry Hay [“Father” of the American “gay rights” movement] donned a sweatshirt printed with the legend, “NAMBLA Walks With Me.” Timmons writes that Hay, “could not contain his outrage” that NAMBLA was excluded (Timmons:296). More recently, as reported in the NAMBLA Bulletin, Hay was a featured speaker at NAMBLA’s annual membership conference, June 24-25, 1994:
“[He] gave an inspiring talk about reclaiming for the 1990’s the spirit of homoerotic sharing and love from various ancient Greek traditions of pederasty. A remarkably balanced and sensitive account of the conference appeared in the August 23 Advocate from a writer who was invited to attend” (NAMBLA Bulletin, September, 1994:3).
From The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party, 4th edition, p. 321-23 http://www.defendthefamily.com/pfrc/books/pinkswastika/html/the_pinkswastika_4th_edition_-_final.htm
Here’s some more about the Stonewall Riot from page 309-310:
The Stonewall Riot and “Gay” Militancy
“Two, four, six, eight — Smash the family, smash the state” (Popular slogan of 1970s “gay” activists –Oosterhuis and Steakley:2)
By 1969, the development of a growing homosexual subculture in America had spawned an open homosexual presence in major cities. So-called “gay bars” sprang up in Los Angeles and New York, hosting a bizarre mix of “street queens,” drug addicts and boy prostitutes (Marotta:71). In New York, homosexuals regularly engaged in public sex acts with anonymous partners “in the backs of trucks parked near the West Village piers” (ibid.:93) and in the public restrooms. Homosexual activity occurred so frequently in the bushes of one public park that the authorities were forced to cut down the trees to stop it (Adam:85). In response to police efforts to discourage this increasingly offensive behavior, homosexuals began to organize to demand the “right” to public deviancy. Emboldened by their numbers, they began picketing businesses such as Macy’s Department Store, which had cracked down on homosexual behavior in their restrooms (ibid.:85).
On the evening of June 27, 1969 the “gay rights” movement officially adopted terrorism as a means to achieve power when a surly mob of “drag queens, dykes, street people, and bar boys” physically attacked police officers conducting a “raid” on the Stonewall Bar on Christopher Street in New York. Stonewall was “one of the best known of the Mafia controlled bars” (Marotta:75), and was being closed for selling alcohol without a license. It was also a haven for sexual deviants. As police began to take some bar patrons in for questioning, a mob of homosexuals gathered across the street.
Homosexualist Toby Marotta’s The Politics of Homosexuality includes an eyewitness report by a writer for the Village Voice:
“[A]lmost by signal the crowd erupted into cobblestone and bottle heaving…The trashcan I was standing on was nearly yanked out from under me as a kid tried to grab it for use in the windowsmashing melee. From nowhere came an uprooted parking meter—used as a battering ram on the Stonewall door. I heard several cries of “Let’s get some gas,” but the blaze of flame which soon appeared in the window of the Stonewall [where the police officers were trapped] was still a shock” (ibid.:72).
By morning, the Stonewall bar was a burned-out wreck, and homosexual leaders had declared the violence a success. Interestingly, the anniversary of this event is known today as “Gay Pride Day” and features parades and other events most notable for their public sex and nudity (ibid.:158). It is ironic that the very activists who emerged from this new militant environment developed (in 1970) the strategy of claiming victim status through the use of the pink triangle and commemoration of the homosexuals who were persecuted by the Nazis (Adam:86).
Pink is the New Brown: Mozilla Homo-fascism and The Pink Swastika
I once asked a journalist who was doing a story about my listing as a “hate group” by the Southern Poverty Law Center to ask SPLC what I would take for them to de-list me. SPLC replied to him that I would have to recant my book, The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party (co-authored with Orthodox Jewish researcher Kevin E. Abrams). I will never recant The Pink Swastika because it is the truth, so I guess I’m a SPLC “lifer.”
The SPLC knows that the most dangerous aspect of my 25-year Christian ministry to stop the LGBT political agenda is the truth contained in the pages of this book. That militant agenda rests on a foundation of sand: ie. the premise that homosexuals are victims of society who can only escape persecution and eventual extermination by expunging all disapproval of their sexual perversion from public life. The bottom-most layer of that foundation is the claim that homosexuals were victims of the Nazi Holocaust.
In 1995 Kevin and I published the 1st Edition of The Pink Swastika to counter historical revisionism by the homosexual political movement which had been attempting since the 1970s to fabricate a “Gay Holocaust” equivalent to that suffered by the Jews in Nazi Germany. In those days the primary symbol of the homosexual movement was the inverted pink triangle, which designated homosexuals in Nazi work camps.
Some homosexual political factions in existence in the early 90s still use the pink triangle on a limited basis, but publication of The Pink Swastika succeeded in stopping that movement-wide campaign, indirectly forcing the “gays” to abandon the pink triangle as the primary symbol of their movement. (They switched to the rainbow.) “They didn’t dare to continue using the pink triangle as their primary symbol, because it would have drawn attention to the damning truth we had published in The Pink Swastika.”
Yes, some effeminate homosexual men aligned with the German Communist Party were in fact persecuted by the masculine/macho homosexual men of the fascist Nazi Party, but it was a relatively small number and they were never targeted for extermination like the Jews. The far bigger story is the widespread homosexuality among the perpetrators.
Solely for making this assertion, and proving it with 400 pages of documentation on the centrality of homosexuality to the Nazi movement, the SPLC has also labeled me a “Holocaust Revisionist,” a nasty lie which is close to the top of the list of “100 Reasons to Hate Scott Lively” that is today posted on the refrigerators of every leftist journalist and political activist on the planet (a slight exaggeration, perhaps).
On the contrary, the cover-up of the homosexual roots of Nazism is one of, if not the greatest feat of historical revisionism the world has ever seen. The sheer volume of documentation that has been suppressed to protect the homosexual movement from its own past is staggering.
Kevin and I are now working on the 5th Edition of The Pink Swastika, a slow process, because, believe it or not, there is still such an enormous volume of additional material that our researchers have uncovered. I am methodically working (in my spare time) through a 3-foot stack of photocopied pages from at least 200 new sources. The 5th Edition may be over 500 pages long by the time we get finished with it.
Importantly, and alarmingly, the claims of The Pink Swastika which link homosexuality with fascism are also being proven by the emergence of a form of homo-fascism in our own society. The forced resignation of Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich is the latest example, but there are many in recent years. “Gay” bullies have become the new Brownshirts (just as they were the original Brownshirts).
Mark my words, these Pinkshirts will eventually grow as violent as the Brownshirts were. We got a taste of it when Floyd Lee Corkins attempted mass-murder at the Family Research Council, following the inspiration of non other than the SPLC. The window-smashing lesbian riot against Ryan Sorba at Smith College a few years ago comes close. My own favorite was the time I received the “Truth Teller Award” from Peter Labarbera’s Americans for Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH). Early on the morning of the event LGBT activists smashed out the windows at our host church in Arlington Heights, Illinois with a paving stone scrawled with the demand “SHUT DOWN LIVELY,” accompanied by threats of more violence posted on the Internet by the perpetrators.
At the time of the AFTAH incident I noted that in posting an admission of responsibility and threat of future violence ala Al Qaeda, the “gays” had crossed an invisible line from intimidation into terrorism. http://www.scottlively.net/2012/12/23/2012-the-year-of-the-smear/
With the firing of Eich, simply for donating six years ago to Proposition 8, the LGBT fascists have crossed another line. “I think there is a gay mafia,” Bill Maher said in a televised discussion of the Eich‘s purging. “I think if you cross them, you do get whacked.” When even a confirmed reprobate like Maher acknowledges the existence of homo-fascism you know it’s bad. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/04/04/bill_maher_there_is_a_gay_mafia_if_you_cross_them_you_do_get_whacked.html
What happens next? If history repeats, the answer to that question lies in the pages of The Pink Swastika, which you may read in the 4th Edition in its entirety here:http://www.defendthefamily.com/pfrc/books/pinkswastika/ or in the downloadable beta versions of the first three chapters of the 5th Edition (recommended) here:
http://www.scottlively.net/tps/ Both of these are free to read and disseminate without charge, and I urge you to make the maximum use of them while it is still possible to do so. God willing we will release the 4th Chapter of the 5th Edition by the end of April. Stay tuned
In closing, to show that there truly is “nothing new under the sun” regarding the homosexual agenda I will quote Hans von Tresckow from his memoirs of his service as Police Commissioner of Berlin in the late 1800s and early 1900s:
“[I]t is not the sense of duty towards one’s fellow men or the nation that forms the rule of conduct for homosexualists; but in every turn of life and in all their striving they think only of the good or harm they may do to their own clique of friends.”
History never repeats identically, there are always variations colored by culture of the day. The cultural color of Nazi Germany was brown, but in millennial America pink is the new brown.
World Vision, Tom Minnery and Appeasement Theology
I was too busy to weigh in on the World Vision scandal when Dr. Michael Brown broke the story this week (though he was not credited when it went viral). His brilliant commentary and analysis is a must-read:
Now, predictably, there has been a “reversal” of the World Vision decision to embrace same-sex “marriage,” after what I expect was a “vision” of bankruptcy when the boycott calls started flooding in to their switchboards.
I say predictably, because any clear-thinking person could have told Richard Stearns and the other leaders at World Vision that Bible-believing Christians (a substantial part of their donor-base) were never going to accept this betrayal of Bible truth.
What has been unmistakably revealed in this scandal is that the leadership at World Vision does not hold a Biblical worldview. We’ve had clues of that from the organization’s increasing hostility to Israel in recent years (just do an internet search on World Vision and anti-Semitism), and from Stearn’s increasingly accommodative comments on LGBT issues (see Dr. Brown’s article).
So why is Tom Minnery of Focus on the Family rushing in to help them with damage control? “We were grateful to learn that this organization, which has done so much for so many over the years has reversed itself and will maintain the integrity of its Christian principles,” said Minnery. Integrity of its Christian principles? You first have to have such principles in order to “maintain” them. These stewards of over a billion dollars annually of God’s money have plainly shown that they are not following Christian principles but “Gay Theology,” the chief heresy of our age.
I’ve had my disagreements with Tom Minnery, but I consider him a Christian brother. I know that he does not embrace this “gay” heresy, himself. Neither am I putting myself on the same level with him as a cultural influence. He is one of the most powerful men in Christendom today, while I run a humble inner-city mission church with a maximum capacity of 45. Yet in Christ we are equals and I do not hesitate to suggest that his approach to this scandal is a form of appeasement, and is representative of a widely-held but fundamentally flawed mindset that has brought the American pro-family movement to the edge of extinction. We’ve adopted humanistic public-relations strategies in place of the powerful but unpopular truth of God, and, especially in this case, confused mercy with permissiveness.
World Vision has blatantly betrayed Christ and His Word. Its leaders should not be restored to Christian fellowship without repentance, which in this case would mean at minimum a clear repudiation of the reasoning that led them to embrace “gay marriage.”
When you find out that the funny-looking “sheep” is actually a wolf in a nice wool jacket, you don’t put him back in with the flock.
Last June I warned that the “gays” had completed their 40-year takedown of all secular resistance to their agenda with their 2013 conquest of the Boy Scouts of America (it began in ’73 with their conquest of the American Psychiatric Association), and that all of their battle-hardened cultural warriors and war machinery would now be turned against the church. I warned that their primary weapon would be “Gay Theology.” http://www.scottlively.net/2013/06/23/a-warning-to-the-church-in-america/
One week later Alan Chambers shut down Exodus International, a global coordinator of independent ex-“gay” ministries, apologizing for ever having said homosexuals could change. His embrace of “Gay Theology” led him to repudiate 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 which says that former homosexuals who had been healed by Christ were part of the early church. Fortunately, a new umbrella group, Restored Hope Network has replaced Exodus and the work of helping homosexuals recover continues.
That was just the first salvo in what I believe is the final battle for Christian civilization in America: the battle for the church itself. Since then there have been many attacks, the most recent (before World Vision) being Dan Cathy of Chick Fil A appearing in the Atlanta Journal Constitution with the homosexual leader of “Campus Pride,” saying his statements in support of Biblical marriage in 2012 was a business mistake. http://americansfortruth.com/2014/03/22/chick-fil-a-ceo-dan-cathy-sells-out-heeds-advice-of-gay-activist/ This was no less a blow to the pro-family movement than the betrayal of Benedict Arnold in the Revolutionary War.
In the comments section under my article blasting Cathy’s selfishness, Christians were rushing to his defense, saying he needed to be restored to fellowship. Of course he should be restored, AFTER he has repented of his sin.
Brothers and Sisters in Christ, please awaken to the seriousness of our situation. The enemy is over the wall and fighting in our back yard. The tactics of trying to appease them by secularizing our arguments, dodging media criticism, acting “nicer than Jesus,” and compromising our values to keep the peace have not stopped them yet and won’t stop them now.
The answer to “Gay Theology” is not “Appeasement Theology.” The answer is the restoration of Masculinity in the church. We are at war and we need to step up and push back the antichrists wherever they intrude into the church. Richard Stearns needs to convince us that he understands why his actions were wrong before he receives another cent from Christians. Dan Cathy needs to convince us that standing for the truth of the Bible is more important that being allowed to put his restaurants on college campuses before we give him back our trust. We of the Bible-believing remnant need to start pressuring everyone who purports to speak for us to get off the defensive and start articulating the whole truth of God on this issue — regardless of the price they will pay for doing so!
The time for hiding behind the timid and tepid “defense of marriage” strategy and refusing to identify homosexual conduct and militancy as the problem is over, or our movement is over. God’s Word is our most powerful shield and sword. Let’s drop all of the human-driven philosophy of politics and public debate and put our trust in His plain truth backed by our zeal. If you can’t articulate and defend the Biblical worldview you have no business in Christian leadership.
Dan Cathy Takes the Mark of the Beast
That headline is not true. Dan Cathy of Chick Fil A has not (to my knowledge) taken the Mark of the Beast. Yet he has done something that suggests he might be willing to take it if faced with that choice, in the same way that answering a poll is an indication of how a person will vote in an election. As the Bible says in Luke 16:10, “He who is faithful in a very little thing is faithful also in much; and he who is unrighteous in a very little thing is unrighteous also in much.”
Dan Cathy was given a great opportunity by God to show faithfulness to His truth by standing for authentic marriage. He became a great hero to Bible-believing Christians by refusing to back down when the homo-fascists demanded he retract pro-family statements in 2012. The mayors of Boston, Chicago and Philadelphia even pledged to deny Chick Fil A business permits in their cities (coincidentally the very penalty listed in Rev 13:17: “they could not buy or sell without the mark”), but the overwhelming nationwide wave of support that Chick Fil A received was one of the most encouraging events of the past decade.
This week, Dan Cathy took it all back by saying His stand for God was a business mistake. (After all, one cannot serve both God and Mammon: Matthew 6:24)
Nobody knows better than I do the price that one pays for standing up to the LGBT bullies. They are not only vindictive and relentless, they are also very creative in their methods of harassment. And there is an entire army of them ready to pounce on anyone who crosses them. I am absolutely certain that they tried their best to make Dan Cathy’s life a constant, living hell since 2012.
Just think of the nastiness of high-profile elections in the final weeks of a campaign when the mud-slinging is the fiercest and the dirty tricks are the most cruel and invasive. Now multiply that by ten, take away the throngs of energized supporters rallying behind the candidate being attacked (so he has to face it alone), and stretch it out over months or even years. Throw in a few honey-tongued “hostage negotiators” pretending friendliness and concern (in this case Shane Windmeyer of “Campus Pride), promising that all the pain will go away if you just compromise the truth. If you can imagine that you can get a glimpse of what it’s like to be targeted by the “gays.” The greater your threat to their agenda, the worse it gets.
It’s really hard to stand up to that kind of pressure, and I have sympathy for Mr. Cathy, but it’s nowhere close to the amount of pressure that Christians will face in the days of persecution that lie ahead of us. Persecution like many of our brothers and sisters in Moslem countries, for example, are already facing.
True, defending the plain truth that God limits sexuality to the confines of authentic marriage, and specially condemns homosexuality from Genesis to Revelation, is not the same as defending the deity of Christ and your allegiance to Him. One’s salvation does not hinge upon the perfection of one’s doctrine. But it is still very important to God.
I am convinced that God is using the homosexual issue as a test of believers all over the world. It’s like the “stress test” the central bankers are using to forecast which banks would fail in the event of an economic collapse. Except in this case God is testing us for what we will do in the coming moral and spiritual collapse. The Bible hasn’t changed, only the culture has changed, and believers are being “stress tested” to see whether they stand with Him or with the world on the things He says are true but which the world is pressing very hard to declare false.
God’s rebuke to Jeremiah when he complained about the power of the wicked should be ringing in our ears about now: “If you have run with footmen and they have tired you out, Then how can you compete with horses? If you fall down in a land of peace, How will you do in the thicket of the Jordan?” (Jeremiah 12:1-5)
The good thing about a stress test is that it gives people an opportunity to change their ways (repent) before the final exam or the big crash. God doesn’t care about Chick Fil A’s profit margins if they come at the expense of Dan Cathy’s willingness to stand up for the truth under pressure. What would it profit Mr. Cathy to gain the whole world (or a few more restaurants on college campuses), if his compromise of Biblical truth today makes him less able to resist the real Mark of the Beast tomorrow?
I’m not saying that Dan Cathy isn’t saved, but he has certainly failed the stress test, and failed the Bible-believing Christian remnant everywhere, by surrendering to the “gay” bullies. How long before we see Chick Fil A running “gay”-friendly commercials as penance for Cathy‘s “homophobia?”
Where is courage in Christendom? Where is the loyalty to Christ that once placed love for Hid Word above every other thing, including life itself? Why have we become so afraid of the opinions of men who hate God and His truth?
There are varying theological views about what the Mark of the Beast is, or will be, and which ones among us will face that choice of taking or rejecting it. Nevertheless, it stands as a symbol to all Christians everywhere as the choice for or against Christ when the sword is on your neck and to choose Christ means to die saved, or live condemned to hell. The stress test of pressure from “gay” bullies is not life or death, but it is an indicator of whether you have the faith and courage to choose Him over the things of this world. In my mind’s eye I used to see the Mark of the Beast as a black dot on the back of the hand. Now it looks more like a Chick Fil A sandwich. I’ll never buy another one, and I hope you won’t either.
Harvard, Mother Jones and the “Gay” Bullies
Recently I participated in a debate at Harvard Law School on the issue of criminal justice. It featured five candidates for Governor of Massachusetts, of which I am one. The event was marred by the infantile antics of Harvard’s homosexual student group, Lambda, whose members stood and turned their backs to the stage whenever it was my turn to speak, and laughed and sneered loudly at all of my comments throughout the evening. The topic of the debate was entirely unrelated to homosexuality or the LGBT sub-culture, yet these overgrown adolescents forced themselves on the crowd and their agenda into the debate. Their complaint against me echoed almost verbatim the slanderous rhetoric of last week’s Mother Jones article, “Meet the American Pastor Behind Uganda’s Anti-Gay Crackdown.”
I am the man being portrayed as a monster in that myth, writing not only as a candidate but as a pastor. I am greatly concerned about the decline of personal integrity and civility as American cultural values, which I attribute to the rise of cultural Marxism, exemplified in part by the cult of “gay“ bullies who now dominate our public discourse in virtually every sphere of society, but also by the parallel cult of pro-LGBT “advocacy journalists“ who routinely bear false witness to the public in furtherance of their shared ideology.
I value my integrity, and speak plainly and unapologetically about what I believe, without regard for political correctness or the opinions of my adversaries. I do not hesitate to define homosexuality as a behavioral disorder with serious, moral, sociological and public health consequences. I am proud to say that I advocated for the Russian ban on advocacy of LGBT propaganda to children and that I want other nations to follow suit. I declare frankly that my opposition to so-called “gay” marriage and “gay” adoption of children derives from my belief that homosexuality itself is wrong and harmful to the people who practice it and to society. Note carefully that I am not parsing my words or spinning euphemisms. I say what I believe and believe what I say. I say it without malice, or an intention to provoke malice in others. This is simply objective truth from a Biblical worldview, shared (largely in silence) by millions of good-hearted Americans.
Hate me for my views, if you must, but do not doubt my honesty. When I tell a reporter, such as Mother Jones’ Mariah Blake, that I do not support the Ugandan anti-homosexuality law as written, you can bank on it. She obviously did not believe me. I can forgive that, since leftist journalists who trade in spin and propaganda naturally assume everyone is a liar. What I cannot leave unchallenged is her omission of my many comments and observations which would have contradicted her premise that I am to blame for that law, and shown the law’s implications to be less draconian than appears at face value. A partial list of these follows:
First, it was not my idea to go to Uganda, I was invited by the government to educate key leaders on the strategies and tactics of the “gay” political movement. I was there to serve, not to lead.
Second, suggesting that my preaching overpowered the will and reason of an entire nation of Africans is breathtakingly racist. These people are not children, nor ignorant jungle savages. Most of the democratically elected government officials of Uganda whom I met are as or more intelligent and competent than Ms. Blake (whom I perceive as very bright and talented).
Third, Ugandans are far more familiar with the negative aspects of homosexual orientation than Americans are. Every June 3rd is Martyr’s Day, memorializing the brutal slaughter of 22 young men and boys by the homosexual King Mwanga in the late 1800s for refusing to submit to sodomy. It is one of the reasons why Uganda criminalized homosexuality many years before anyone there ever heard of Scott Lively.
Fourth, it was the Ugandans themselves who requested information about the homosexual recruitment of children, wanting to better understand this phenomenon that they had observed in their midst. Most of the complaints that I heard from average people in Uganda related to male homosexual sex tourism corrupting boys and young men. I probably would not have addressed the topic on my own. My lectures tend to emphasize the history of the “gay” movement and the socio-political ramifications of its agenda, not the sexual activities of the LGBT community.
Fifth, I did not participate in the drafting of the Ugandan law and opposed it’s harshness from the very beginning. The Ugandans did not adopt my suggestions to emphasize therapy and prevention rather than punishment. That having been said, the hysteria about the law in the west is dramatically overblown, since virtually all African criminal law is overly harsh in the letter, but lenient in the application. Poor countries rely on deterrence since they don’t have money for jails. It is highly unlikely that anyone will serve any more time in jail for breaking this law than under the anti-sodomy laws of our own country in the 1950s (was your grandmother a “vicious homophobe” for supporting those U.S. laws?).
Sixth and finally, the veiled implication that Uganda is a bloodthirsty nation bent on genocidal extermination of homosexuals is outrageous and absolutely false. There is greater violence committed by revelers in Chicago after a singe Bulls game than a decade-worth of “homophobic” persecution of “gays” in Uganda. Indeed, even the absurd lawsuit against me for “Crimes Against Humanity” lists only a handful of relatively minor civil rights abuses over a 10 year period. My inbox is filled with hate-mail and death threats accusing me of complicity in torture and murder of “thousands” of homosexuals in Uganda, but the only homosexual activist murder that I know of is David Kato, whose “gay” lover is serving 30 years in prison for the crime.
Blake is entitled to her personal opinion. But neither she, nor any of her journalistic peers who have repeated the identical false narrative about me, are entitled to make the news fit their subjective opinions while posing as objective reporters. This deceptive ideological advocacy in place of objectivity is unfortunately what journalism has degenerated to in our increasing post-Christian society.
Americans once had a greater ability to tolerate opposing views. We didn’t accuse people of “hate” for disagreeing with us, or for pointing out the flaws in each others’ conduct or political philosophy. We didn’t break up public meetings and shout down speakers with opinions opposed to our own. That was what other, less civilized , societies did: the right-leaning Marxist Brownshirts of Germany, the left-leaning Marxist Bolsheviks of Russia. We believed in civility, and indeed, the tolerance for differences that we cherished was the very soil in which the “gay” sub-culture once thrived, when it’s stated (largely accomplished) goal was “the right to be left alone.”
But now our own version of Brownshirts and Bolsheviks run the show. Armies of “gay” bullies pummel anyone who disagrees with them on any point of LGBT doctrine, from Anita Bryant in the 1970s to Phil Robertson in 2013. (Try to name a single public figure in the past decade who has criticized homosexuality in the U.S. and not been targeted for destruction.) Careers are ruined, businesses bankrupted, reputations destroyed, families terrorized, sometimes merely for whispering that authentic marriage is one man and one woman. Anti-discrimination laws, passed on the promise that they would be a shield to protect innocent people from malicious prejudice, are transformed almost immediately into swords for LGBT activists to attack people of faith. Compromises by groups like the Boy Scouts, made to accommodate “gay” demands, do nothing but harden the implacable LGBT militancy.
In lock step, armies of ideologically unified .pro-LGBT “journalists” routinely paint the bullies as victims and the victims as “homophobes.”
At the Harvard debate I was an invited guest, yet I was subjected to a humiliating two-hour barrage of mockery, invective and slander by a handful of childish boors, emboldened by Mother Jones‘ assassination of my character. My hosts did not even ask them to behave. No one dared to applaud any of my comments, though my views on the restorative model of criminal justice were undoubtedly shared by many of the roughly 200 people in attendance (heads were nodding perceptibly in agreement). Everyone in that room, except me, was intimidated by the “gay” bullies.
At the root of all of this is a contest of ideas and ideals between Christians and Marxists. Our society is coming apart at the seams because the Marxists are winning, and replacing the Christian ideals of tolerance, mutual respect, self-restraint and personal responsibility with political correctness, factionalism, moral anarchy and statism. They’re invoking all of the terms associated with Christian culture, but redefining them to suit the Marxist model. Objective truth is the only remedy, so I will keep on speaking it despite the bullies at Harvard and their apologists at Mother Jones.
###
FYI,
The video clips embedded in the Mother Jones story are taken from a nasty piece of propaganda called “Scott Lively’s Nuclear Bomb,” which bracket clips from my 2009 lectures in Kampala between other film clips and analysis designed to spin my comments as incitement to violence. It is ugly and sickening.
I don’t have a copy of that video, but I have an audio file of one lecture, about 80 minutes long, which includes several of my statements which are used in the anti-Lively “documentary.” It is available here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8N3I1n0temmY21VVU9TbGVIY0E/edit?usp=sharing
Download and listen to the lecture to see just how deceptively they have edited my comments and taken them out of context to suit their evil purposes.
Russia, the United States and Human Rights
Let me be clear from the outset that in my view the United States of America remains the gold standard for human rights in the world and Russia remains an autocratic state with many lingering and greatly disturbing Soviet-era tendencies. On a scale of 0-100 with 100 being the best, the United States is in the high 70s while the Russian Federation is in the mid-50s. The problem is that the United States is rapidly trending downward from a high in the 90s, while Russia has been steadily trending upward from a low in the 30s. It is thus foolish for anyone who cares about genuine human rights to blindly root for one side or the other as if this were a sporting event, though there is plenty of that going on, especially by Russian-bashers trapped in a Cold War mindset.
I am uniquely positioned to comment on this conflict. I graduated Trinity Law School with a de-facto “major” in human rights, and earned a Certificate in International Human Rights from Strasbourg. I have traveled extensively in the former Soviet Union, where I lectured on human rights in numerous universities, and, while in Latvia, I authored the Riga Declaration on Religious Freedom, Family Values and Human Rights in 2007. In my capacity as President of Defend the Family International I was in Moscow last October and met with high level representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church and Russia’s pro-family movement.
I am also the first American to be sued, here in America, for “Crimes Against Humanity” under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), by the ironically named “Center for Constitutional Rights“(CCR), for preaching against homosexuality in Uganda. (I am a pastor as well as a lawyer.) This still pending case is subjecting my First Amendment rights as an American citizen to a European legal standard in U.S. Federal Court, for speech that was protected both in the U.S. and Uganda. What is more, my case is the only ATS case not dismissed following the 2013 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court to all but strike down the Alien Tort Statute. Some people believe that the continuation of this case is itself a human rights abuse: http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen2/13d/lively-lawsuit-ponsor-issues/index.html.
What made the United States the freest and most prosperous nation in the history of the world was Christianity; not the theocratic version that existed in Europe, but the Christian self-governance model of our Founding Fathers. Their view of “unalienable rights” “endowed” on us by our “Creator,” not the state, is the foundation of American human/civil rights. When they crafted the Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution it was not by accident that the first principle was religious liberty, even ahead of freedom of speech. Indeed, our second president and co-author of the Declaration of Independence, John Adams, issued a fervent warning to future generations that “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
The ancient foundation-stone of all modern human rights law in the world today is the Magna Carta, signed in Britain in 1215. Importantly, that document, too, sets as its first principle “ that the Church of England shall be free, and shall have all her whole Rights and Liberties inviolable.”
It is therefore obvious why America is in decline and Russia is on the ascendancy in the matter of human rights. America has largely turned her back on God, reorganized her government and culture on a statist model, and is plummeting in a death spiral of moral and ethical degeneracy. As our collective former (Bible-based) values of self-restraint and personal responsibility steadily decline, external controls and surveillance by the new police state increase. The rule of law becomes the rule of man, and equal justice under law becomes special rights for favored groups.
Conversely, Russia has begun embracing Christian values regarding family issues, albeit imperfectly, in stark contrast to its aggressively godless Soviet past. Repression in Russia is decreasing as rapidly as it is increasing in the U.S..
The crux of the human rights debate is what it means to be human. Russia appears to be returning to it’s pre-Soviet understanding that humans are made in the image of God, and that our “rights,” are really duties of respect and care for each other which are imposed on us by Him. This is why the first principle of both the Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights is the protection of the Christian church, from which the very concept of modern human rights emerged. And this is why the greatest point of conflict between the U.S. and Russia is the question of homosexuality. (I believe even the conflict in Ukraine is being driven to a large extent by this issue, at least on the part of the Obama State Department and the homosexualist leaders of the E.U.)
There is no human right to sodomy to be found in nearly 4000 years of human rights jurisprudence. It is an invention of Cultural Marxists in the late 20th century, and rests on their dangerous premise that the state, not God, grants us our rights. In fact, the “right” to sodomy is really an anti-right, because it can only be granted at the expense of the true human rights of religious freedom and family values. Thus, the first principle of the Magna Carta stood unbreakable in Britain for almost 800 years until the recent introduction of “sexual orientation regulations” (SORs) and the first principle of the First Amendment stood for over 200 years until SORs were passed here in the United States.
Today, both the Magna Carta and the First Amendment are deemed to be trumped by the “right to sodomy” in case after case, and pro-homosexual activist federal judges in the U.S. are striking down “Defense of Marriage” laws in the most morally conservative states in the union with brazen disregard for the constitution and the will of the people.
I ask you, which is the greater threat to human rights: Russia’s law preventing homosexual activists from disseminating their propaganda to children, or the lawless decrees of these American federal judges? I submit that the former is not a threat at all, but a reaffirmation of true human rights (in that case the right of parents to raise their children according to their own values), while the latter is an egregious affront to liberty and an undermining of respect for the rule of law, which endangers all human rights.
Russia has a long way to go even to meet today’s tarnished standards in America, but if current trends hold, Russia will eventually supplant the U.S. as the greater defender of true human rights. Unfortunately, at the pace that our country is falling, that day may not be far off.
