02/7/17

Ivanka Trump Promotes Gay and Transgender Rights

By: Cliff Kincaid | Accuracy in Media

She’s been labeled the “Daughter-in-Chief” by the tabloids and, in this case, it appears to be the truth. According to several news accounts that have not been denied or debunked, Ivanka Trump and her husband, Jared Kushner, persuaded President Donald Trump to retain an executive order from the Obama administration that prohibits companies from doing business with the federal government unless they hire and promote open homosexuals and transgendered people.

The so-called “transgendered” are people confused about their “gender identity” who may be in various phases of transition to the opposite sex, in some cases involving gender mutilation and surgery. In short, they are DNA deniers, a category of people considered to be engaged in immoral and perverted conduct by the standards of traditional morality and religion.

On Sunday, Vice President Mike Pence, usually described as a conservative Christian, used the jargon of various sexual minorities, including “Q,” which can mean “Questioning” and/or “Queer,” and sided with the powerful sexual rights lobby that has discovered some clout in the Trump White House. He declared on ABC’s “This Week” that “I think throughout the campaign, President Trump made it clear that discrimination would have no place in our administration. I mean, he was the very first Republican nominee to mention the LGBTQ community at our Republican National Convention and was applauded for it. And I was there applauding with him.”

In another matter related to this expanding assault on traditional religious values and biological differences between the sexes, it is significant that President Trump has not Tweeted his disgust or disdain for the recent decision by the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) to admit girls who claim to be boys.

Traditionally, the BSA has instructed young men and boys in the masculine way of doing things, including engaging in what the Scout Oath calls “morally straight” behavior.

The involvement of Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner in the culture war—on the side of the liberal/left lobby—has been a shocking development. A happily-married couple with three children, they are described by The New York Times as the “two most influential social liberals” in President Trump’s inner circle, who had helped “kill a proposed executive order that would have scrapped” the special rights for homosexuals and transgendered in the Obama-era executive order. The proposed executive order would have safeguarded the rights of religious believers opposed to condoning or sanctioning conduct they reject on religious grounds.

Politico had previously reported that while Ivanka and Jared were influential in Trump’s decision to keep the Obama executive order, some conservative Christian groups such as the Family Research Council were hopeful that Vice President Pence would weigh in on the side of those who refuse to condone alternative lifestyles. But based on what Pence said on ABC’s “This Week,” in declaring his own support for alternative lifestyles, this looks like a false hope.

At the same time, it is rumored that President Trump is in fact preparing to issue an executive order promoting religious liberty. But how he can be pro-gay and pro-religious liberty remains to be seen, and is a question on the minds of many conservatives.

At the time that it retained the Obama order on the rights of sexual minorities, the Trump White House issued a statement saying, “President Donald J. Trump is determined to protect the rights of all Americans, including the LGBTQ community. President Trump continues to be respectful and supportive of LGBTQ rights, just as he was throughout the election. The executive order signed in 2014, which protects employees from anti-LGBTQ workplace discrimination while working for federal contractors, will remain intact at the direction of President Donald J. Trump.”

However, the 2016 Republican Party platform declared that “Traditional marriage and family, based on marriage between one man and one woman, is the foundation for a free society and has for millennia been entrusted with rearing children and instilling cultural values.”

From all appearances, Ivanka and Jared have a traditional marriage; both have successful careers and are devoted to the conservative religious upbringing of their children. They should understand that the homosexual movement has sought to destroy the concept of traditional marriage and has relentlessly undermined organizations that have attempted to maintain traditional sexual distinctions. The BSA’s decision to admit girls claiming to be boys is just the latest evidence of how private organizations have been pressured to capitulate to the demands of what Laurie Higgins of the Illinois Family Institute calls the “sexual subversives.” Higgins writes that their ultimate goal is “the eradication of all public recognition and accommodation of sexual differentiation.”

It looks like Trump will continue the Obama policy in this area.

Regarding the BSA, Todd Starnes of Fox News asked, “…how can the Boy Scouts of America teach ethics and morals when its adult leaders can’t muster the courage to stand morally straight in the face of militant gender revolutionaries?”

Any hope Ivanka Trump has that her support for special rights for sexual minorities will defang radical left opposition to the Trump presidency is proving false. Major department stores such as Nordstrom and Neiman Marcus have dropped her clothing and fashion lines because of feminist objections to her family and to her father’s presidency.


Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism and can be contacted at [email protected] View the complete archives from Cliff Kincaid.

01/13/17

Marxist Radicals Plan To Disrupt Trump Inauguration… Party Outside Pence’s Home [AUDIO]

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

Once again, my long time friend and colleague, Trevor Loudon, has uncovered plans by the radical left to create mayhem. This time it is #DisruptJ20 (a bunch of Occupy Wall Street wannabes) and Trevor got audio of some of their plans for next week. Trevor does this type of research and goes into the lion’s den of communists to obtain proof of what they plan and scheme. This time… he hit the jackpot.

This radical group is planning to disrupt the Inauguration any way they can next week. They will block security checkpoints, they will physically fight with Bikers for Trump and others that come to the Inauguration and they are planning a dance party at Mike Pence’s home. The plans are extensive. They have planned to kick off their festivities with a “pure dance party at Mike Pence’s house” on Jan. 18th. They are going to accost the home of the Vice President-elect. I hope he has a ton of security there and they are none too gentle with these asshats.

“It’s his last few days living in Chevy Chase before he moves into the vice presidential residence, and we’re going to send him off with a bang,” the unidentified woman gleefully says in the audio.

From Fox News:

An anti-Donald Trump group is planning massive disruptions for next week’s inauguration covering everything from “blockades” at security checkpoints to a “dance party” outside VP-elect Mike Pence’s house, according to group leaders as well as newly obtained audio of their apparent plans.

The organization #DisruptJ20 already announced at a press conference Thursday its various plans to wreak havoc at Trump’s Jan. 20 inauguration and in the days leading up to it.

A conservative group also shared with FoxNews.com what it said was audio from a Jan. 8 #DisruptJ20 meeting at a Washington church, giving even greater insight into the group’s planned D.C. “shutdown.”

The audio, recorded by Trevor Loudon with Capital Research Center, purports to show a female member detailing plans to “do everything we can to try and stop people from being able to access the inauguration.”

After they are done trying to ruin Pence’s home, the group will turn their attention to one of the main events… the “DeploraBall,” which occurs the next day on the 19th. The group is calling it the “alt-right neo-Nazi … party to celebrate Trump.” That’s disgusting and nothing could be further from the truth. “We’re gonna crash it,” she says. Again, I am sure that Trump will have a ton of security there, as well as the police and these people are not going to get a warm reception.

On the morning of the actual Inauguration, the group plans to block security check points and entrance avenues into the event. “We’re going to be doing blockades,” the woman says in the audio. “We’re going to [be] blockading checkpoints into the security zones. We’re also going to be blockading roads and other modes of transit into the city.” And there is more to their itinerary. At 10 am, they are planning an “anti-Capitalist, anti-fascist bloc” that “will be an unpermitted march that will be leaving from Logan Square.” This is where I expect them to get their violence on. I can’t imagine the Capitol police don’t already know about this and are gearing up for it.

Griff Jenkins of Fox News is all over this and doing a great job of reporting on it. These plans were presented at a January 8th meeting and there evidently were a lot of people there. What’s even wackier is that they are being fairly up front about it and are proud of what they are about to do. She went on to say: “We’re exercising our freedom of speech and really want to set a tone for the next few years that there’s a massive body of people … who are very concerned about the dangerous direction Donald Trump is taking our country in.”

From KeyWiki.org:

“Momentum is building for a historic day of action on January 20th, jamming the streets of DC ahead of Trump’s inauguration parade and making it impossible for the media to gloss over Trump’s hateful agenda. The country will know: we don’t cooperate with an illegitimate fascist president, and they don’t have to either.”

At the above link, you will also see a partial list of those interested and those attending the radical gatherings.

#DisruptJ20 members are not shy about their plans. One organizer told Fox News he hopes to “turn the inauguration into as big of a clusterf— as possible.” ANSWER Coalition will also be there. They will protest as well, but are approaching it from a different angle. They are galvanizing tens of thousands of people at permitted locations — like Freedom Plaza and the Navy Memorial — to march and protest in a more traditional way.

The #DisruptJ20 audio was obtained by Dangerous Documentaries, a project of the Capital Research Center, as part of its upcoming documentary on left-wing protesters, “America Under Siege: Civil War 2017.” The film is set for release before Inauguration Day. I just want to say that Trevor Loudon pretty much risked his life to get that audio and should get credit for it. Trevor was discovered and thrown out, but not before he secured the audio. You can visit his site here and then go to KeyWiki.org, where the bulk of his research is located.

If you are going to DC for the Inauguration or any of the festivities, please watch out for each other and realize these radicals mean business.

07/21/16

Trump’s Blind Spot on Russia

By: Cliff Kincaid | Accuracy in Media

Russia

It is not unusual for a politician to change his mind, even on critical national security matters. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) essentially flip-flopped on the damage done by NSA defector Edward Snowden. He went from saying that Snowden may have violated the law to accusing the NSA defector of being an outright traitor. On Thursday night, while the media continue their preoccupation with style rather than substance, Republican presidential candidate Donald J. Trump will be watched closely to see whether he has learned anything about the aggressive intentions of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Trump’s position on Russia has been so weak, from a national security perspective, that Hillary Clinton has accused him of being soft on Putin. “He praises dictators like Vladimir Putin,” Clinton said of Trump. “He says he has foreign policy experience because he ran the Miss Universe pageant in Russia.” The criticism of Trump has caused a number of GOP foreign policy experts to say they cannot support the New York businessman for president.

Trump has praised Putin, and vice-versa. What’s more, one of his top advisers on national security matters, retired Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, the former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), has been embarrassed by revelations that he went to Moscow to celebrate the 10th anniversary of Russian propaganda channel Russia Today (RT) and sat next to Putin at a gala dinner. Flynn was being considered as Trump’s vice-presidential nominee.

At the GOP convention, Flynn was caught off-guard during an interview when Michael Isikoff of Yahoo! News questioned him about the financing of the trip to Moscow. Flynn insisted that his speakers’ bureau paid for the trip. “Ask them. I was given an opportunity and I took it,” he said. Of course, even if there was a speakers’ bureau involved, the money came from Moscow, and most of it went to Flynn.

At the time, we called it “Moscow’s Five-Star Treatment of a Three-Star Army General.” We broke the story of Flynn flying to Moscow.

On the defensive, Flynn said, “I have no problems calling out Russia.” He is the author of the new book, The Field of Fight: How We Can Win the Global War Against Radical Islam and Its Allies.

But Flynn is known for advocating cooperation with Moscow in the Middle East, despite evidence that Moscow is using the refugee crisis as a weapon of war against the West.

Of course, as Flynn is quick to point out, Mrs. Clinton’s “experience” has been a disaster for the nation, as her “Russian “reset” paved the way for the Russian invasion of Ukraine and Russian military intervention in Syria.

But what will Trump do to counter the Russians in Europe and the Middle East?

The criticism of Trump’s soft position on Russia has been a sore point with many on the conservative side. It doesn’t appear that Trump understands Putin’s geo-political game plan on the world stage.

This is one reason that GOP 2012 presidential candidate Mitt Romney had denounced Trump.  “Trump says he admires Vladimir Putin, while he has called George W. Bush a liar. That is a twisted example of evil trumping good,” said Romney.

By contrast, Mike Pence, the Indiana governor and former member of Congress picked as Trump’s running mate, has had a more realistic view of Putin. At the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2015, he said that “A new Iron Curtain is descending down the spine of Europe as modern Russia seeks to redraw the map of Europe by force.” He added, “Putin’s Russia ignores talk of sanctions, claims land and supports rebels in Ukraine with impunity.”

Has Trump changed his position on Russia? There’s no evidence that he has done so.

Josh Rogin of The Washington Post noted that Trump’s people watered down a provision of the 2016 GOP platform calling for a tough response to Russian aggression. “The Trump campaign worked behind the scenes last week to make sure the new Republican platform won’t call for giving weapons to Ukraine to fight Russian and rebel forces, contradicting the view of almost all Republican foreign policy leaders in Washington,” he reported.

Rogin added that “Republican delegates at last week’s national security committee platform meeting in Cleveland were surprised when the Trump campaign orchestrated a set of events to make sure that the GOP would not pledge to give Ukraine the weapons it has been asking for from the United States.” He noted that Diana Denman, a platform committee member from Texas who was a Cruz supporter, proposed a platform amendment calling for “providing lethal defensive weapons” to the Ukrainian military. Trump’s people vetoed that, and put in the phrase “appropriate assistance.” That means that Trump would continue the Obama policy of failing to give Ukraine the weapons they need to defend their nation and turn back the Russian invasion.

Meanwhile, Senator Cruz has become a more realistic thinker about Russia, and has admittedly changed his position on the damage done by former NSA and CIA employee Edward Snowden, who is now living in Moscow. “If Mr. Snowden has violated the laws of this country, there are consequences to violating laws and that is something he has publicly stated he understands and I think the law needs to be enforced,” Cruz said in early 2013.

Later, however, Cruz said, “Today we know that Snowden violated federal law, that his actions materially aided terrorists and enemies of the United States, and that he subsequently fled to China and Russia. Under the Constitution, giving aid to our enemies is treason. By disclosing secret intelligence information to our enemies—helping terrorists evade our surveillance overseas—Snowden made it more likely that Americans will be killed. It is now clear that Snowden is a traitor, and he should be tried for treason.”

To his credit, Trump recognizes Snowden’s treason. “I think Snowden is a terrible threat, I think he’s a terrible traitor, and you know what we used to do in the good old days when we were a strong country—you know what we used to do to traitors, right?” Trump said on Fox News.  The implication was that Snowden should be executed. “This guy is really doing damage to this country, and he’s also making us look like dopes,” Trump said.

What Trump doesn’t talk about is the fact that Snowden’s sponsor and patron is Putin’s Russia, and that Snowden has facilitated the activities of the Islamic State targeting citizens in the West, including the United States.

At the GOP convention on Tuesday night, Donald Trump, Jr. said, “If Hillary Clinton is elected, she would be the first president who couldn’t pass a basic background check.”

But could his father pass a background check? That’s the question that will be on many minds when the Republican candidate accepts the nomination and outlines his vision for the Free World.

Whatever he says, doubts will still surround some of his top advisers, including Paul Manafort, a “fixer” with Russian connections.


Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism and can be contacted at cliff.kin[email protected]View the complete archives from Cliff Kincaid.

04/6/15

Republican Party Elites Abandon Traditional Marriage

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

Only six of 54 Republican members of the Senate signed a pro-traditional marriage legal brief to the U.S. Supreme Court that was submitted on Friday. USA Today noted, “By contrast, 44 Democratic senators and 167 Democratic House members filed a brief last month urging the court to approve same-sex marriage. The brief included the full House and Senate [Democratic] leadership teams.”

These developments strongly suggest that while the homosexual movement remains solidly in control of the Democratic Party, the tactics of harassment and intimidation that we saw wielded against the religious freedom bill in Indiana last week are taking their toll on the Republican Party as a whole.

In the Indiana case, a conservative Republican governor, Mike Pence, abandoned the fight for religious freedom in the face of homosexual and corporate pressure.

It appears that more and more elite or establishment Republicans are simply deciding to give up on the fight for traditional values and marriage.

While this may seem politically expedient, this dramatic move to the left by the GOP could result in millions of pro-family conservatives deciding to abandon the Republican Party in 2016, a critical election year.

USA Today also noted that “…while some members of the 2012 Republican National Convention platform committee filed a brief against gay marriage Friday, it notably did not include GOP Chairman Reince Priebus.”

The Republican senators signing the brief included:

  • Senator Ted Cruz of Texas
  • Senator Steve Daines of Montana
  • Senator James Lankford of Oklahoma
  • Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma
  • Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky
  • Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina

Fifty-one members of the House of Representatives signed the brief. But House Speaker John Boehner’s (R-OH) name was not on it.

Taking the lead for traditional marriage in the House was Representative Tim Huelskamp (R-KS), who not only signed the pro-marriage brief but has also introduced House Joint Resolution 32, the Marriage Protection Amendment, to amend the United States Constitution to protect marriage, family and children by defining marriage as the union between one man and one woman. The resolution has 33 co-sponsors and has been referred for action to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Huelskamp is the only Member of Congress who has authored one of the 30 state constitutional amendments that prohibits homosexual marriage and polygamous marriage. In 2005, when he was a state senator, 71 percent of Kansans voted for the state constitutional amendment that he authored.

In reintroducing the federal marriage amendment, Huelskamp said, “In June 2013 the Supreme Court struck down section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which had defined marriage for federal purposes as the union of one man and one woman, but upheld the right and responsibility of states to define marriage. Since then, though, numerous unelected lower court judges have construed the U.S. Constitution as suddenly demanding recognition of same sex ‘marriages,’ and they struck down state Marriage Amendments—including the Kansas Marriage Amendment—approved by tens of millions of voters and their elected representatives.”

However, on April 28 the U.S. Supreme Court will review the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling, which upholds marriage laws in Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio and Tennessee. A ruling is expected in June.

USA Today noted that scores of prominent Republicans last month joined a brief on the homosexual side filed by former Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman, a former lieutenant to Karl Rove who came out of the closet and announced in August of 2010 that he was a homosexual. He has since launched a “Project Right Side” to make the “conservative” case for gay marriage.

Big money Republican donors such as Paul Singer, David Koch, and Peter Thiel have either endorsed homosexual rights and same-sex marriage or funded the homosexual movement. Thiel is an open homosexual.

A libertarian group funded by the Koch brothers, the Cato Institute has been in the gay rights camp for many years and its chairman, Robert A. Levy, wrote a “moral and constitutional case for a right to gay marriage.”

Other signatories to the Mehlman brief included Governor Charlie Baker of Massachusetts, Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Mark Kirk of Illinois, and former presidential candidates Rudolph Giuliani and Jon Huntsman.

The signers of this brief at the Supreme Court in support of same-sex marriage were described as “300 veteran Republican lawmakers, operatives and consultants.” Some two dozen or so had worked for Mitt Romney for president.

One of the signatories, Mason Fink, who was the finance director of the Mitt Romney for president campaign, has signed on with a super PAC promoting former Florida Republican governor Jeb Bush for president. In another move signaling his alignment with the homosexual movement, Bush has reportedly picked Tim Miller, “one of the most prominent gay Republicans in Washington politics,” as his communications director.

A far-left media outlet known as Buzzfeed has described Bush as “2016’s Gay-Friendly Republican,” and says he has “stocked his inner circle with advisers who are vocal proponents of gay rights.”

But some conservative Christians are fighting back against the homosexual movement.

A brief to the court filed by Liberty Counsel notes that, in the past, the Supreme Court has upheld marriage as “a foundational social institution that is necessarily defined as the union of one man and one woman.” It cites the case of Skinner v. Oklahoma, in which marriage was declared to be “fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race,” and Maynard v. Hill, in which marriage was declared “the foundation of the family and of society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress.”

Liberty Counsel said the court is being asked to affirm a false notion of marriage based upon fraudulent data about homosexual activity in society. It said, “For the past 67 years, scholars, lawyers and judges have undertaken fundamental societal transformation by embracing Alfred Kinsey’s statistically and scientifically fraudulent ‘data’ derived from serial child rapists, sex offenders, prisoners, prostitutes, pedophiles and pederasts. Now these same change agents, still covering up the fraudulent nature of the Kinsey ‘data,’ want this Court to utilize it to demolish the cornerstone of society, natural marriage.”

The homosexual movement has long maintained that Kinsey validated changes in sexual behavior that were already taking place in society. In fact, however, the evidence uncovered by Dr. Judith Reisman shows that Kinsey deliberately exaggerated those changes in a fraudulent manner by using data from pedophiles and prisoners.

Commenting on the impact of the acceptance of the fraudulent Kinsey data, Accuracy in Media founder Reed Irvine noted, “Gradually over the years, acceptance of the Kinsey morality has grown to the point where premarital and extramarital sex raise no eyebrows, where, in some communities, out-of-wedlock births are in the majority, homosexuality is glorified and aggressively promoted in our schools and the last taboo—adults having sex with young children—is now under attack in some of our institutions of higher learning.”

The Mattachine Society, a gay rights organization started by communist Harry Hay in 1950, cited the flawed Kinsey data in an effort to convince the public that homosexual behavior was widespread in American society.

The book, Take Back! The Gay Person’s Guide to Media Action, said the Kinsey Report on male sexuality “paved the way for the first truly positive discussion of homosexuality in the mainstream media.”

Today, this same Kinsey data is being used to convince the Supreme Court to approve homosexual “marriage” as a constitutional right.

04/1/15

The Real Power of the One Percent

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

Statistics show that 1.6 percent of the population identifies itself as gay or lesbian. But judging from the hysteria over Indiana’s religious freedom law, it seems that many of them are in positions of power in the media. These power brokers are not only openly gay, but also anti-Christian. Even Holy Week hasn’t kept them from demonstrating their anti-Christian animus.

Indiana’s Republican Governor Mike Pence spoke on Tuesday about the media misinformation over his state’s religious freedom bill. The “perception problem” he referred to is of the liberal media’s making. In fact, one can argue that the misperception was deliberately created by the media.

“I have to tell you,” he said to the press and the public, “that the gross mischaracterizations about this bill early on and some of the reckless reporting by some in the media about what this bill was all about was deeply disappointing to me and to millions of Hoosiers.” He called the coverage a “smear.”

Pence was reluctant to identify the source of the bias—homosexual influence in the major media. But until conservative politicians step forward to identity the real source of the problem, the homosexuals will continue to win the public relations battle and hide behind the façade of “objective” coverage when none exists. The fact is that the liberal media and the gay lobby are essentially one and the same.

It’s this kind of media bias that should not have come as a surprise to Pence, a former member of Congress and a strong conservative.

Liberal media bias is an old problem. The new wrinkle over the last several years has been the relentless promotion of the homosexual lifestyle.

Two years ago a Pew Research Center study of news media coverage of the gay marriage debate found that “Stories with more statements supporting same-sex marriage outweighed those with more statements opposing it by a margin of roughly 5-to-1.” Pew reported, “The findings show how same-sex marriage supporters have had a clear message and succeeded in getting that message across all sectors of mainstream media.”

The media know they’re biased, of course. They are careful to conceal the depth and extent of the bias, in the sense that few members of the public are being told that most of the major news organizations are financial backers of the National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association (NLGJA). Literally all of the major media, ranging from MSNBC on the left to Fox News on the right, are in bed with the NLGJA.

However, we were somewhat surprised to find that even a financial channel such as CNBC is not above the slanted coverage. On Monday, as we reported, coverage of the markets and economics gave way to a lengthy interview with open lesbian Kara Swisher, who smeared opponents of gay rights as the equivalent of racists.

Regardless of what happens in Indiana, where Pence has vowed to clarify the statute, the issue won’t go away.

The Indiana case should serve as a lesson in how the media distort the news. The clear homosexual/media strategy, in this case, has been to redefine discrimination as the failure to do what homosexuals have demanded that you do, without explaining to the public how the meaning of the term has been changed to meet the demands of the powerful gay lobby.

Since our major media organs are openly pro-homosexual, we have to conclude that the bias in the Indiana case is deliberately designed to fool the American people into thinking that homosexuals are the victims when they are, in fact, the victimizers.

In practical terms, this bias is reflected in the typical ongoing failure of the media to quote pro-family and Christian voices, such as American Family Association of Indiana Executive Director Micah Clark, who has called the claim that the law bestows a “license to discriminate” as “perhaps the biggest lie about this law.” Pence said much the same thing at this press conference.

If our media had simply bothered to cover the other side of the story, rather than rely on pro-homosexual interest groups, we might have gotten some truth and facts in the national debate.

The victims of this bias, unfortunately, include top CEOs and businesspeople, such as Marriott International CEO Arne Sorensen, who called Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act “madness.”

Upon reflection, Sorensen must himself be mad or completely misinformed. Or, perhaps, he’s just pandering to homosexuals for their business. Marriott was named Corporation of the Year by the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce in 2014. It received a 100 percent score on the Human Rights Campaign’s “Corporate Equality Index.”

The Human Rights Campaign is the group whose co-founder, Terry Bean, has been arrested on child sex-abuse charges.

Perhaps people like Sorensen don’t want to know the facts and simply don’t care whether the rights of Christians are violated in the pursuit of providing special rights for homosexuals.

Micah Clark, of the American Family Association (AFA) of Indiana, explains how the Indiana law works: “This law does not allow a person of faith to deny service to someone, nor should it,” he points out. “No Christian bakery owner should say that people involved in homosexual behavior couldn’t shop in their bakery. That, in my opinion is wrong, un-Christian and discriminatory unless the patron is misbehaving ( i.e., ‘no shirt, no shoes, no service’). However, when a customer seeks special participation from the baker, asking him or her to specially decorate a ‘gay’ wedding cake and come set it up at a homosexual wedding, then there is a very different line crossed, and a problem for most people of faith.”

The Indiana law attempts to protect people of faith from being forced to participate in activities that they have religious objections to.

The American Family Association has noted the following four cases in states without a religious freedom law involving Christian business owners being prosecuted, fined or punished for refusing to bow to homosexual demands:

  • Washington: Florist Barronelle Stutzman was fined by the state for not providing flowers for a homosexual wedding.
  • New Mexico: Photographer Elaine Huguenin was ordered by the state to give a lesbian $7,000 for declining to take pictures of a lesbian wedding.
  • Oregon: Aaron and Melissa Klein were fined $150,000 by the state for refusal to bake a cake for a lesbian wedding.
  • Kentucky: Blaine Adamson was ordered by the city of Lexington to undergo “sensitivity training” for refusing to print T-shirts for a gay pride festival.

Alliance Defending Freedom, a legal group involved in several of these cases, says there are three key issues at stake:

  • Whether the government can force Americans in expressive professions to communicate messages and ideas against their will
  • The freedom of Americans to live and do business according to the teachings of their faith and the dictates of their conscience
  • Whether Americans should be forced to compromise freedoms guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution

The case of the florist in Richland, Washington, Barronelle Stutzman, owner of Arlene’s Flowers, illustrates the stakes. She is being sued by the Attorney General because she declined to decorate for a same-sex ceremony and may be forced into financial bankruptcy.

Joseph Backholm of the Family Policy Institute of Washington state has commented about the case:  “…there’s a problem with the argument that she discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation. She has consistently and happily done business with people who identify as gay for years, including the individuals involved in this case. She considered them friends.” What she objected to was being part of a same-sex marriage ceremony.

In this case, as noted by her attorneys with the Alliance Defending Freedom, a state judge ruled that the government can force her to do custom design work and provide wedding support services “even if she has a religious conviction that marriage is between one man and one woman.”

As such, this is a violation of the basic God-given right to freedom of religion that the founders of the United States gave to the American people. It is as sacred as freedom of the press.

This is the issue: In the name of “non-discrimination,” homosexuals want to force Christians and other religious believers to violate the principles of their faith. But this is precisely the point that has been deliberately obscured by a media that functions as the propaganda arm of the militant gay lobby.

ADF Senior Counsel Kristen Waggoner noted, “The couple had no problem getting the flowers they needed. In fact, they received several offers for free flowers. So, where’s the tolerance for Barronelle Stutzman? It’s hard to believe that Barronelle should prepare to have everything she has earned and built seized by the state just because of her beliefs about marriage.”

Apple CEO Tim Cook, an open homosexual, attacked Indiana’s religious freedom law, saying, “There’s something very dangerous happening in states across the country.” What is dangerous is how a small minority is trying to dictate the acceptance of their lifestyle by the majority. They have gotten this far because the same small minority also seems to control major centers of media and corporate power in the United States.

04/1/15

Unholy Assault on the Hoosier State

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

I was watching CNBC on Monday for updates on the markets and economic affairs when I suddenly found technology “journalist” Kara Swisher of “Re/code” being “interviewed” by the “Squawk Alley” team about Indiana’s new religious freedom law. She compared opponents of the homosexual agenda to racists and said that Indiana Governor Mike Pence (R), who signed the law, is “shameless.” The interview went on and on, with no opposing views presented.

Although shocked at first by her blatant hostility toward Christian America, a little digging discovered that Swisher is a major player in the gay community and CNBC is a major outlet for homosexual propaganda.

Swisher, who has interviewed President Obama and Hillary Clinton, had been a featured speaker at the “Lesbians Who Tech” summit, where she used the “F” word quite liberally and declared: “I’m often confrontational, so F— you.”

The group “Lesbians Who Tech” describes itself as “a Community of Queer Women in or around tech.” The American people might be interested to know that the sponsors of the “Lesbians Who Tech” event included Google, ebay, Wells Fargo, Intel, Walmart, Target and Amazon, among other corporations.

Not surprisingly, the pro-homosexual Huffington Post ran a glowing profile of the summit by its own correspondent, a self-described “Lesbian-Feminist, Public Intellectual PhD” by the name of Marcie Bianco. This appeared in the on-line publication’s “Gay Voices” section, which has also featured a video of full frontal male nudity.

When I pointed this out recently, I was attacked by the “conservative” Daily Caller for somehow exaggerating what The Huffington Post had done. It’s a sign of the times that even a “conservative” outlet is reluctant to expose the shameless promotion of homosexuality in the media. One of the main funders of The Daily Caller is a Christian by the name of Foster Friess.

At the risk of promoting this kind of repulsive “journalism,” it is important to note that The Huffington Post item, Male Full-Frontal Nudity Supercut: Which Stars Have Bared It All?, which appeared in the “gay voices” section, was exactly as I described it—a form of gay porn.

But when Christians get repulsed by this kind of thing and seek to protect their families and children from it, they are singled out as bigots.

With Google in the news because of its clout and influence with the Obama administration, it is important to note that Swisher has announced on her website that Megan Smith, a former vice president at Google and Swisher’s “longtime spouse from whom I am now separated and have two children,” is now the Chief Technology Officer of the United States, working for President Obama.

Smith’s White House bio also discloses that she previously served as CEO of PlanetOut, a company that targeted lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders. It was then acquired by Here Media Inc., which owns the Alyson Books publishing division.

Do you remember the “children’s books” which carried the titles Heather Has Two Mommies and Daddy’s New Roommate? Those were published by Alyson. Some of its more recent titles include the “S/M classics” Coming to Power and Leatherfolk. The latter is described as a book about a “distinct subculture” known as “the gay and lesbian leather underground.”

But don’t expect any coverage of this “lifestyle” by the major media, except perhaps to promote it.

Swisher’s softball interview was not a surprise. She has a CNBC “profile” on the channel’s website, demonstrating that she is a regular. Indeed, her online “news” service “Re/code” is owned by Revere Digital, whose minority investors and strategic partners include the NBCUniversal News Group. This guarantees Swisher access to such media properties as CNBC, MSNBC, “Today,” and the “NBC Nightly News.”

This helps explain some of the homosexual movement’s clout in the major media.

CNBC won’t advertise the fact, but the channel is itself a big backer of the National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association (NLGJA). Mandy Drury, Simon Hobbs and Carl Quintanilla of CNBC have appeared at NLGJA fundraisers.

At one NLGJA event, Natalie Morales of the NBC “Today” show described how “Many of us here in this room—the media—we are responsible for opening the world’s eyes to these issues and the stories that have brought about such change.”

Now that they’re on the verge of getting the Supreme Court to declare gay marriage the law of the land in all 50 states, the homosexuals in the media are identifying and demonizing their enemies in the heartland of America. That’s what Indiana is all about.

Swisher and her lesbian and gay allies are saying “F— You” to traditional American values.