Although the current intent of my blog is to continue pushing for Obama’s removal from office (and we will not stop until he’s gone), I want to set aside that just for the moment to comment on the U.S. Supreme Court ruling earlier this week involving the Westboro Baptist Church and a lawsuit against it by a grieving father of a deceased U.S. Marine. I have followed the actions and theology of this church almost since I first got online nearly 10 years ago (don’t ask me how I first heard about them as I can’t recall) and would like to throw in my personal two cents and more.
I am the son of former Navy dad who served during the Korean War. My dad did not die while in combat (he later committed suicide from acute alcoholism) but he did serve his country faithfully. I later received a beautiful naval flag from President Reagan in honor of my dad’s service. I did not serve myself but suffice it to say that I know a few things about the military. And I am a huge supporter of our troops, though I have come to question why we’re fighting wars overseas against a 1400 year old religious ideology hell bent on killing those who don’t subscribe to it. However, that’s a subject for another day.
Although not in the same right, I can and do have the utmost empathy and compassion for Albert Snyder for the loss of his son Matt in combat. I can only imagine what he went thru to know his son paid the ultimate price for his country. I can’t say I personally know what this father is feeling but I do have a pretty good idea.
However, as much as I feel the dad’s pain (acknowledging President Clinton’s famous words), to be true to the U.S. Constitution, I must concede that the pariahs of Westboro Baptist had the constitutional right to do what it did in protesting, even if it didn’t have (and never will) the moral right to do so.
In all the years the WBC has conducted its galling protests against our deceased men and women in uniform, its members, largely comprised of Fred Phelps and his extended family, have faithfully complied with all state and local laws wherever they have been. They picket on public sidewalks and have never disrupted the ceremonies conducted at churches, funeral parlors and cemeteries. They have even obeyed ordinances to stand hundreds of feet away from such facilities, though those ordinances are now facing legal scrutiny as a result of the 8-1 high court ruling. So say what you wish about this church’s obnoxious protests, they aren’t illegal.
Yes, I know I may take some heat from those criticizing my position here, considering nearly every attorney general in America sided with Mr. Snyder. It almost sounds like I’m defending the ACLU, the one organization that should be on the societal scrapheap and one whose agenda I fought for several years to thwart.
But rest assured I am not.
Although we can’t read into the minds of our Founding Fathers as to what they would think if they were alive today, I daresay they would frown on the actions of the WBC. But knowing their steadfast fealty to the Constitution they wrote, I seriously doubt they would abrogate their fiduciary duty to it.
It’s great to see the public come to the financial aid of Mr. Snyder so he doesn’t plunge into bankruptcy and financial disaster. But he could have avoided it all because in reality, he stood little chance of victory, despite a favorable judgment in a Maryland lower court.
The article in USA Today points out that Mr. Snyder “sued for damages based on the emotional distress Westboro picketers caused him”. Although I’m not a lawyer, I do have a logical legal mind. And my first thought is this – how does one determine an appropriate sum of money to punish someone or some group based on emotional pain? To me, this is the first sign I knew this case was flawed from the start. Anytime one has to come to subjective conclusions as to how much money one is due for some intangible action, you know you could be headed for trouble.
For example, if a hospital is sued because its doctors damaged an organ in the course of surgery, the patient is most certainly entitled to have all medically related injuries to that organ fully covered. Lost time from work and home that would otherwise not be an issue should be fully compensated as well. These are objective costs as specific monetary dollars come into play. And even a fixed punitive fine may well be appropriate (provided the bulk of it goes to the patient and not the lawyer.
But how does one properly determine appropriate compensation for emotional damages, often known as “pain and suffering”? It’s literally anybody’s guess. One dollar amount may be right for one person; another person may disagree and believe such “pain” should result in more money being given than the first person; a third person may yet have another figure. Is $5 million, the original jury verdict at the district court in favor of the father, a fair sum for him? It’s all about what one thinks and feels.
Listen, I am not standing up for these Kansan loose screws. These protests are despicable. But where does one draw the line? Was Mr. Snyder forced to watch the Phelps’ clan? Granted, as ABC reported, there was a 30 foot gap between the protesters and the front entrance of the church where Matt’s funeral was being conducted, ”forcing” the family to reportedly use a side entrance. It’s arguably difficult to escape seeing those nasty signs when you’re just 10 yards away from them.
But unless Phelps members stepped on private property, as much as I hate to say it, and I do, they didn’t do anything constitutionally wrong. Their presence was obnoxious and noxious, no doubt. But is $5 million a fair price for obnoxiousness? That is the question.
It is stunningly shocking that 48 out of 50 attorneys general would go to the lengths they did to write amicus statements in favor of the Snyders. It’s perfectly understandable to stand with the family. The moral high road is to do so. But the higher road is to stand with the Constitution, not withstanding the church’s juxtaposed view of morality here.
Now I said all I said as a born again Pentecostal Christian of over 30 years. I confess Jesus Christ as my personal Lord & Savior and I know if I were to die today, I would go to meet the Almighty in Heaven because of that relationship.
But on a constitutional level, if this is today’s legal mind of America’s attorneys general, we are in heap big doggy doo. The proper role for them should have been to not support the church because of its warped view of America and its military, nor Mr. Snyder, but to pray the public obtains a correct understanding of the Constitution in today’s society. The 48 men and women in this capacity should have taken a spectator’s role and not that of a participant.
Aside from the case, I have wanted for a long time now to talk about my own personal knowledge and understanding of the WBC, perhaps from an angle not previously perceived by the public. And this court ruling helps pave the way.
It appears something has happened to the WBC website at this time as I am unable to access it to provide details. Perhaps the site’s web host pulled it after the ruling or after one of the Phelps gang promised to “quadruple” the protests, I don’t know. If the church can’t get hosting because its most recent host terminated it or if no other host wants to be paid to display this church’s literally hateful message, all I can do is smile. The only concern I have is if the feds had something to do with the site’s shutdown. Otherwise, it’s a great thing.
For the record, if my memory is correct from past visits to the main site, hosting was provided by the appropriately named First Amendment hosting. We speculate but cannot prove since the site is down that this was (and perhaps still is) the web host.
We tried GodHatesFags.org and .net and both are currently shown as registered and parked by GoDaddy.com (the .com site is registered and parked by DirectNic.com). There are other sites the WBC has registered but I cannot recall what they are except for GodHatesAmerica.com which, like the others, currently isn’t working.
So since the site is inaccessible for the moment, I will rely on my experience and personal knowledge of the group to share with you, my readers.
As I said at the start, I don’t recall how or when I first heard of the WBC (2003 or 2004 would be my best guess) but I soon started finding out who they were. And without having networked with anyone, I soon began to see how this church’s theology was in conflict with my Christian faith and how I was brought up.
Back then, the church was one to be reckoned with. It was not because they had a large following. They had anything but that and still don’t to this day. The church is largely comprised of family members (admittedly they have heed the Lord’s command from the Book of Psalms, “blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them”). And amongst those members, several of them are attorneys. Perhaps Shirley is the most recognized of them. I don’t know who the others are offhand. Regardless, the fact these folks had the oddest doctrine unlike anything I ever heard did not detract from their astute legal minds. They do not lose cases. In fact, I can’t recall one they have lost. They know their Constitution. They know the 1st Amendment as well as any constitutional expert. They’re not dummies.
And they have collected tidy sums of money for their legal victories. One I recall was a 1st Amendment victory from the city of Topeka (KS) where the church is located. I don’t specifically remember what the suit was about except I believe it had something to do with the city’s failure provide police protection during a picket when an outsider instigated an altercation. The church went after the city and I believe settled out of court for $170,000. And the Phelps were proud of it, having made a copy of both sides of the $170K check and then posting it online.
Before the Phelps clan started picketing funerals (which had been roughly since 2007 or 08), their main thrust was protesting at any and every facility that was knowingly and publicly promoting homosexuality in any context. It didn’t matter where and what the specifics were. If the church found out that homosexual perversion was going on anywhere, they made a point of being in attendance.
And anywhere didn’t necessarily just mean the United States. The Phelps folks protested along the Canadian border. Since the Canadian government would not permit them to cross their borders, referring the WBC as a hate group (which it most definitely is), they were confined outside Canada’s points of entry. They also went to Sweden and even Australia. Their legal business made the Phelps gang rich and they spent their money accordingly.
Here are just a few examples where the WBC would go:
- Schools, colleges and other venues where the play or film the Laramie Project (it was both) was occurring or where known homosexuals were going to speak
- Legislative offices and bodies, city halls, courthouses, preparing to enact or enforce laws promoting civil unions, same sex marriage or hate crimes legislation
- Theatres and entertainment centers where celebrity homosexuals (like Elton John, Ellen DeGeneres, Melissa Etheridge) were performing on a given day or night
- Churches preparing to either bless civil unions or same sex marriage or conducting ceremonies (legal or not) for those wanting such recognition
- Denominational headquarters where talk of approving homosexuality in any form in the denomination was being planned
Say what you want about the church’s message, they are not afraid of carrying it out.
But what is most unfortunate is that with the church being financially “blessed” (and I use that term towards the WBC in an oxymoronic way) is that its members could be going to these above establishments to do a lot of good. It is certainly appropriate in a proper context to confront practitioners and promoters of homosexual activities. It’s even fitting on occasions in a firm but loving way to directly warn them of their behaviors; that such invariably lead to pain, misery, disease, death and worst of all, a Christless eternity.
However, to tell people that God hates them, and worse, that they have no hope, is a horrible message to send, let alone completely unbiblical. If God hated the world, He would have never sent Jesus Christ to the cross to die for our sins and theirs.
Yes, God does hate sin and He hates the acts avowed homosexuals commit. Homosexual activity was the only sin in the Bible (Gen. 19) met with punishment by fire and brimstone. And seducers of children into it (or for that matter, any activity that keeps a child from knowing his or her Creator) potentially face the wrath of God (Matt. 18).
But to never give anyone the option of leaving this lifestyle (or any other sinful activities) runs contrary to the scriptures and the heart of God. And yet that’s what the Westboro Baptist Church does. They lump pretty much all America and the world with the sinners. In other words, the Phelps clan believes that we are all responsible for other people’s sins. It contradicts scriptures like in Ezekiel 18 about the father not being responsible for the son’s sins and vice versa as well as Romans 14 about each person solo being accountable to God for their sins of commission and omission.
Yet this has been the WBC’s theme across so many of their press releases. For example, in the fall of 2003 when the Episcopal Diocese of New Hampshire chose to ordain an avowed homosexual minister to be bishop, the WBC stated in one of their releases that all Episcopalians are headed straight for hell with Gene Robinson.
And in some of their other releases targeting Catholic churches, the Phelps folks boldly state that all Catholics are going to hell with their fag priests. This runs very contrary to scripture. All one has to do is go check out Revelation 2 & 3 and read what Jesus said to the apostate churches as Pergamos, Thyatira and Sardis. The Lord had read indictments to the church leaders and congregations but singled out those who were not caught in their corruptions. There is no way one can honestly read those verses otherwise.
A few months after I began getting acquainted with this church, I wrote to it at an e-mail address posted at their website and asked the people there how they could reconcile this blatant doctrinal error. I had received replies from two of their members but one of them, Shirley, one of Pastor Fred’s daughters, exchanged several e-mail chats with me (the name of the other escapes me) before I reluctantly concluded that I could not persuade them of their errors. I pled with Shirley to show me where their views were scriptural. She couldn’t except to engage in name calling. So suffice it to say that her responses were terse, angry and with twisted use of the scriptures (see II Pet. 3:16 which refers to people who do this kind of stuff).
I wish I had saved the chats for everyone to see but unfortunately I didn’t.
Virtually every press release had these words on it (the press releases for the homosexual protests before they began targeting the military:
WBC to protest ….. in religious protest and warning. God is not mocked. God hates fags and fag enablers. God hates so-and-so…… blah, blah, blah.
This is a horrible message to send. It gives those who are trapped in the homosexual lifestyle no help. And it gives more ammo to the radicals and others on the left to condemn Christians and to pressure lawmakers to clamp down.
And if that isn’t bad enough, the church’s website reminded its visitors on a daily basis how many days Matthew Shepard is supposedly in hell. There was also a list of days a California lesbian who died some years ago in a freak incident with a dog is allegedly in hell. They may well be there if they rejected Jesus Christ. But only God knows their hearts – who knows, they could have confessed Christ as the moment they were about to leave this life. Regardless, the constant condemnation is something no bonafide Christian would ever do.
The church essentially believes “once a sinner, always a sinner”. No hope, no help, no change. It’s an extreme form of Calvinism which I believe many of its adherents reject.
This makes you wonder if the Phelps members have a genuine relationship with Jesus Christ. Only God really knows but all signs point to just the opposite. I had tried addressing this in my online conversations with Shirley, all without success.
If the church had even an iota of compassion, it would adopt the principles and actions embraced by one of the most fabulous pro-life groups I have ever encountered. I am referring to David Bereit, National Director of 40 Days for Life, his assistant Shaw Carney and a vastly growing network of motivated pro-lifers.
David, who founded the organization and helps run the website and its action network, is one of the finest individuals I’ve ever encoutered. Although I have not met or spoken with him personally, I have had several e-mail chats with him and have watched his videos. He’s a bonafide born again Christian with the heart of God for the unborn and mothers considering abortion. His credentials (he originally came from the venerable American Life League) and character can be summed up in one word: impeccable.
David and his 40 Days have a mission which began as a once a year project in 2007 but now occurs twice annually. That mission comes from passages in the Old and New Testaments whereby God used a 40 day period to achieve the miraculous, which includes saved babies, persuaded moms and even ex-clinic workers. This group goes out 40 consecutive days to abortion clinics across all 50 states (and now even outside U.S. borders) to pray, hold signs and when the occasion arises, witness and counsel to those preparing to enter the clinics as well as those who work in them. From what this observer has seen, this project has had more impact than any other planned pro-life activity with the possible exception of legal victories gained. And proof of its impact shows in that abortion clinic personnel have become terrified at the successes obtain.
And it’s all done well within the context of the law and the fact it has never had any legal trouble is a testament to the character of the young Mr. Bereit and his army of pro-lifers.
Here’s a great write up on 40 Days and what it does. It is the antithesis of the WBC and their God Hates Fags motto. If the Phelps folks ever decided to adopt and implement the heart and soul toward the homosexual that David and his great legion of pro-lifers do toward pregnant women considering abortion, the continually propped up three legged table that that agenda sits on would rapidly collapse.
It certainly is appropriate to speak out against the homosexual agenda and those who are pushing its evil to cover America. It is important to take firm and even aggressive stands when necessary. But it is thoroughly wrong to stereotype everyone in it as collaborators. Those trapped in it but seeking help must have access to all appropriate useful resources. Condemning them is completely wrong and hurts the cause the same way attacking abortionists and clinic workers does. Thankfully such is virtually non-existent in the pro-life movement. This must be the same attitude reaching the homosexual. The lifestyle is tantamount to seeking an abortion. It’s a dead end wrought with heartache and sorrow and nothing redeeming. But homosexuals need the love of God applied in the same fashion as to pregnant women going to the abortion mills. The WBC fails miserably at it.
So as such, let me close by asking this – is there any group across America who, like the WBC, will picket and protest at facilities promoting the homosexual agenda and speak out against it? And at the same time, is there any group across America with the financial means to do what the WBC should be doing if it was true to the Lord’s call.
If there is, I want to know about it.
I intentionally did not want to emphasize the WBC’s more recent calls to picket the funerals of those who died in battle or otherwise. I feel covering the court ruling and understanding of what this awful church does in that regard more than enough explains their mission in America. It is a dastardly one that has no place in decency. The church may have the 1st Amendment on their side to do what they do but it has the American people squarely against it. I defend their right to do what they do. But their actions are defenseless.
The military has been under fierce moral assault by Barack Obama and his cadre of leftist buds working to make girly men out of our finest men in uniform as evident in the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. The forced homosexualization of our troops is frightening and dangerous. The calls to increase perversion in our armed services by allowing cross dressers and transsexuals to serve are even more troubling, let alone repulsive. Obama’s agenda must be abruptly halted. This is where the focus of the WBC should be, not the men who wear the uniform and pay the ultimate price, even if the wars are not justifiable.
But since the WBC focus is elsewhere, who will step up to the plate and be the equivalent of 40 Days of Life for the homosexual agenda?
P.S. When I began writing this article on Friday, as I noted at the start, the WBC website was for some reason inaccessible. As of yesterday morning (Saturday), someone was apparently hacked into the website or otherwise accessed it as a gay porno site had appeared when typing in GodHatesFags.com. But by yesterday evening, the porno site was removed. Since then, typing in the above comes up with literally nothing. So it appears the church’s site is still down or its hosting has been terminated with no one to pick up the slack. That’s fine by me. As I said earlier, as long as government isn’t censoring free speech, I’m all happy to see the church’s hate message be gone.
For now, good riddance!
Oh, if you want that relationship with Jesus Christ that I have, along with God’s eternal piece, look no further than here.
On the heels of my previous post, which has generated a lot of attention (though not so in terms of petition signatures and letters to Congress, according to personal info relayed to yours truly), a fairly new contact of mine offered a suggestion as to how to up the ante on calling for the impeachment of America’s putative president and Attorney General Eric Holder. I think it’s an outstanding one which should be implemented at once. Without further adieu, let’s go.
This individual, who shall remain anonymous except to say she is a patriotic woman, suggested We the People being organizing en masse outside each and every local office of every Congressman and woman throughout the nation. Considering that not too many folks have the time and money to travel and stay in Washington until Barack Obama is (hopefully) forced out of office, this appears to be the best alternative and perhaps even more effective than going to DC. If all 435 offices (minus the couple current vacancies) of our Congressmen and women (and we may include all 100 U.S. senators as well) was manned from Monday thru Saturday every week with signs and calls for the removal of our usurper president, the media would not be able to ignore the impeachment calls as they are largely doing so now. And of course, neither would Congress.
This would have to be a consistent operation. While having a mass turnout at every office is ideal and something we should strive at, the seemingly more pressing concern would be to have at least bodies out on a daily basis. In other words, it would be great to have 100 men and women outside of every local congressional and senate office. However, it would be better to have 10 of them 6 days a week, than, say 100, three days. Consistency is what is needed, though numbers are also essential.
This would strictly be a grassroots effort without some big name organization wanting to lead the way. It must be run by We the People. However, organization in terms of putting together individuals and groups wanting to participate is very necessary.
Although this is just for starters, my theory of an organizational flow chart is as follows:
- We would need 50 state coordinators who would oversee operations in all 50 states. Although I have not decided whether we should include senate offices at this time, since senators only conduct trials after impeachment are approved, for the moment we will proceed with just the 435 members of Congress.
- Underneath these coordinators will be local coordinators who will be assigned (geographically speaking) to a member of Congress. The local coordinator will oversee sign and picket operations with that Congressman or woman. He or she will be encouraged (but not required) to establish a relationship with a person or persons working for the particular lawmaker. It may be especially difficult to do so with a liberal Democrat.
- State coordinators in states with one legislator representing the entire state (Vermont, Delaware, N. Dakota, S. Dakota, Montana) will be local coordinators as well, however, they will be able to select individuals underneath them to represent individual district offices. This is necessary in both Dakotas and Montana since they are geographically speaking large states. It will be at the coordinator’s option in Delaware as it is a tiny state geographically, though there are three district offices. It will be necessary in Vermont as there is only one district office for its one rep.
- Local coordinators will have individuals underneath them if the Congressman or woman has more than one office in his or her district. If the district has only one office, then the local coordinator obviously represents that district.
- Information as to locations of district offices as well as other contact info for each of the members of Congress can be found here. Although I haven’t counted how many offices there are altogether, it is somewhere in the range of 1000-1500. So this will be a massive operation.
Anyone interested in being a state or local coordinator or someone willing to work under a local coordinator (if applicable) should reach me at firstname.lastname@example.org.
This operation must be peaceful but firm and determined and it must be consistent. We will hopefully arrange for impeachment and other signs to be held outside these offices for public awareness; however, individuals and groups may (and are encouraged to) bring their own signs as well.
Messages on signs cannot be physically threatening in any way. They can and are encouraged to be strong in content but foul language will not be permitted. The pickets and signs will create public awareness as to what Obama is doing to America and will hopefully spur drivers and other passersby to participate. The message on the signs, for those bringing their own, must somewhere state the need for Obama to be impeached or otherwise removed from office. It can state reasons for his removal but it must signal a call for removal, bottom line.
We need to get things going soon as the longer we wait, the more we risk losing our country. We need to put the fire to act in our elected men and women. There is private talk of impeachment in some respects. But we need to stand up for America and insist that Congress do its duty to the Constitution and the American people. It likely won’t occur without us doing the legwork (literally). Let’s get the ball rolling now.
Contact me at the above e-mail address with any questions, suggestions or comments.
With Wisconsin and several other states taking center stage in national news over the legislative skirmishes between Republicans and public sector unions at their respective state capitols, other news items have largely taken a back seat as multitudes of Americans sit and observe these political chess matches. The unrest in the Middle East, rising gas and food prices, foreclosures and jobs, while still high on people’s minds, have somewhat temporarily fallen off the public radar screen as the round the clock protests continue.
One of those items, however, with no shortage of stories, according to Google news searches, was made yesterday via America’s putative president. And that was Barack Obama’s decision to instruct the U.S. Justice Dept. to cease defending a 14 year old law passed by 80% of members in both the U.S. House & Senate. The legislation was known as DOMA or the Defense of Marriage Act.
But while there was significant coverage from the so-called mainstream media and plenty of political buzz and outrage from conservative groups, political pundits and lawmakers, what was noticeably absent was any mention of the “I” word. One of the exceptions was Monica Crowley from Fox News which you can listen to her statement here.
On the left, one group cited as having precedent a decision by the Bush Administration to discontinue fighting a marijuana advocacy policy challenged by the ACLU and struck down in court. However, the issue here was that a public transit agency was being denied their 1st Amendment right to free speech. The agency was apparently not advocating breaking the law but urging policy change to the current law. Though some may find a call to ease marijuana restrictions as offensive, it does not appear to run afoul of the 1st.
The same group also cited for an example of an impeachable offense was an alleged decision also by President Bush to not protect homosexuals due to his alleged failure to adhere to the rules of the Geneva Convention. However, since Geneva is a foreign matter that is (supposed to be) subservient to the U.S. Constitution, that point is moot.
That group also said Bush violated the 4th Amendment for gays but cited no examples. It couldn’t because, despite all the political wrangling, homosexuals are not codified into U.S. civil rights law and should never be since our Declaration of Independence plainly states that all men are created equal, not just those individuals defined by which gender with which they share sexual intimacy.
One individual who strongly believes that Obama should be impeached is former Congressman and champion of secured borders Tom Tancredo. In an editorial to the Washington Times last summer, he called for Obama’s removal based on his abject unwillingness and failure to patrol and control our southern borders. He was one of the first public figures to demand Obama be impeached, 18 months into his faux presidency.
The left wing Media Matters cites claims that calls for impeachment are all smoke and mirrors and to back it up uses as an example a paragraph in a letter from Attorney General Eric Holder to House Speaker John Boehner. The paragraph quotes former Solicitor General Seth Waxman saying that there may be times where compelling legal arguments for or against a statute cannot be made and in such “rare” cases, forgoing the defense of the statute can be viewed as a necessary evil.
It is inexplicable that a defense of millennia of traditional marriage cannot be made by the U.S. Justice Dept. here. The fact is the Justice Dept. has colluded with America’s alleged president that traditional marriage is only in one form and to deny others that is unconstitutional. For Obama and Holder to say that the legal assault on marriages of one man and one woman fails to qualify for a vigorous legal defense implies that 427 out of the 535 members of Congress in 1996 and President Bill Clinton willfully conspired to pass and sign into law an unconstitutional measure.
Sorry, that flies in the face of all common sense, considering that vast numbers of members of Congress are lawyers by trade as was President Clinton. Without doing an exhaustive background research, a very conservative and reasonable estimate of the numbers of lawyers in the 104th Congress easily concludes that at least 50-100 of the 427 who voted for the Defense of Marriage Act are of a legal background.
It is not necessary to further dissect Holder’s and Media Matters’ claims as they are heavily flawed but there is one other paragraph in the attorney general’s letter that is especially factually aberrant and is why DOMA is legally defensible and why this decision warrants both Obama and Holder’s removal.
In the letter, America’s A/G states the four reasons why the law cannot stand judicial scrutiny. Reason two basically renders the other points moot and blows the lid off of this decision. It also dismantles the entire homosexual agenda.
“While sexual orientation carries no visible badge, a growing scientific consensus accepts that sexual orientation is a characteristic that is immutable, see Richard A. Posner, Sex and Reason 101 (1992); it is undoubtedly unfair to require sexual orientation to be hidden from view to avoid discrimination, see Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Repeal Act of 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-321, 124 Stat. 3515 (2010).”
Citing Richard Posner, a lawyer and judge on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, from a book he wrote is not in any way, shape or form compelling to Obama and Holder’s decision. For whoever in the medical field Posner cites to back up his claims, there are just as many in that field, if not more, who will state precisely the opposite.
But the failure of Posner’s so-called proof that sexual orientation is immutable, meaning it is unchangeable, does not lie so much in the medical field (though that is important) as it does those who have lived the homosexual lifestyle and left it. And there are hundreds of thousands who have, including someone I have personally met and consider to be a friend, gospel singer Stephen Bennett.
Although Stephen’s testimony as a former homosexual is stunningly compelling and beautiful, the key issue here is that his example and those of so many others are proof that homosexual behavior is NOT in any way, shape or form immutable. People may be trapped in the homosexual lifestyle but being trapped in it does not mean that there isn’t help to walk away from it, case in point. It isn’t an orientation. It is a preference (see photo 2/3rd of the way down). In other words, we’re talking choice. We’re not talking about being born black, white, male or female, innate traits. We’re talking conduct. We’re talking behavior. We’re talking practices. We’re talking action. Is that clear?
And because people have quit practicing unnatural and unhealthy sex acts that define who they were, the vacuous nature of Holder’s immutability argument essentially nullifies his three other points outlined to Speaker Boehner. Apart from political correctness, they cannot legally stand, let alone this agenda.
And neither can this decision by Obama and Holder.
Besides former Rep. Tancredo, there have been little in the way of impeachment calls since then from other notable public officials for any reason. There are virtually none with reference to this decision, though Media Matters cites one individual via Twitter.
The fact that many major current public figures are carping on Obama’s decision but saying zilch about impeachment is disturbing. But like me, many other patriots who plainly see what this is all about are. You can find some examples of them here (along with the usual cadre of leftists). One poster named Russ briefly but quite well outlines (halfway down the page) the reasons why Obama and his administration must be ousted.
Article II, Section 3, last paragraph of our U.S. Constitution, states the presidents have an obligation to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed”. Article II, Section 4 states that “The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for and conviction of treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” It is inarguably treasonous that Barack Obama sued the state of Arizona because that state passed legislation to secure and patrol its borders since the federal government has refused to do its job. It is just as treasonous to refuse to execute a duly enacted law passed by a bipartisan Congress and signed into law by a U.S. president, absent blatant unconstitutionality, which DOMA clearly is not.
And it is also treasonous to refuse to supply documentation of natural born citizenship as Barack Obama has stubbornly refused to do for over 2½ years now. For this reason alone, Congress should simply demand Obama’s resignation or take physical measures to do so. Impeachment would be unnecessary since that procedure applies to legitimate presidents. For all practical purposes and with much compelling evidence, it strongly appears Obama is an illegitimate president because all signs point to him not being naturally born.
However, since Congress publicly refuses to address the eligibility issue for whatever reason, it absolutely must take up impeachment for Obama’s deliberate attempt to evade enforcement of our current laws. Who can rationally argue that refusal to enforce a lawfully enacted statute doesn’t qualify for impeachment under Article II, Section 4? Obama, if a true president, could have gone to Congress with his alleged concerns about the unconstitutionality of DOMA and asked for repeal. He did so with Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT), even though the process for repeal and the repeal itself was corrupted and sabotaged with outright lies. But while calling for repeal of DOMA in both the last and current Congress, no congressional action has thus far been taken up.
Thus Obama’s actions are indicative of a king and dictator and must be remedied at once. If not, it stands to reason that he will issue an executive order or take some other measure bypassing Congress to grant amnesty to the 12-30 million (depending on what number you believe) illegals currently here in the U.S. If that occurs, it may well be the impetus whereby countless public demands for his removal will be made but it may also create massive civil unrest unlike anything we have seen since World War II. However, we cannot wait to see if that moment will come. Action must be taken now to remove Barack. This is not so much about DOMA as it is the rule of law and Obama’s actions and inactions creating chaos and a lawless society. It must be put to an end now.
It’s not arguable that this move was political to please and placate the homosexual lobby as the repeal of DADT and the 2009 hate crimes legislation were. Given that Obama:
- has more avowed homosexuals in his administration than any recent previous administration (and at high levels)
- has given frequent speeches to the rabid homosexual Human Rights Campaign (HRC), including one from his wife saying that her hubby was born in Kenya, which was recently removed for some spurious posted claim
- has participated in past (and maybe present) gay activities (which the media will not touch)
- attended a church with numerous open homosexuals
- is rumored to have a gay relationship with his “body man” Reggie Love
These are definitely signs that the homosexual agenda (along with Islam) is at the top of his priorities, both personally and as putative president. Therefore, it is by no means a stretch of the imagination that the decision to refuse to defend DOMA is a political one which suits both his own fancy as well as that of groups like the Human Rights.
This is a serious breach of fiduciary duty to America. And it warrants action from We the People since it seems Congress won’t initiate charges without a massive public outcry.
Since the Constitution plainly states that impeachment charges begin in the House, this is where we must first focus our attention. And as we do, it is imperative that you not only contact our own Congressman or woman for his or her backing but that you request the entire delegation of the state you reside in for their action as well, especially Republicans and conservative Democrats. Given the blatant refusal of Barack Obama to heed to the constitutional requirement to faithfully execute all of America’s laws, this matter far transcends a local representative’s district. It affects the entire country.
To that end, I have created a letter which you can use to write or fax (please do not e-mail) your elected officials. Although it is far preferable to put your thoughts into your own words, in a serious matter like this I believe it is OK (should you choose to do so) to copy the content of this letter and paste it into your own Microsoft Word or other program. Be sure to then print and sign it. Your signature states that though you may be copying someone else’s letter (as in this case), you fully endorse its content by signing it.
If you plan to fax and have a system that does so by computer, it would be preferable in this particular case to do a hand fax instead since the automated fax does not have a visible signature.
Here is the letter I have sent to 8 of the 9 Congressmen in this state, including my own:VIA FAX:
Congressman Lamar Smith, House Judiciary Chairman – (202) 225-7680
Congressman Peter Visclosky – (202) 225-2493
Congressman Joe Donnelly – (202) 225-6798
Congressman Marlin Stutzman – (202) 226-9870
Congressman Todd Rokita – (202) 226-0544
Congressman Dan Burton – (202) 225-0016
Congressman Mike Pence – (202) 225-3382
Congressman Larry Bucshon – (202) 225-3284
Congressman Todd Young – (202) 226-6866
Dear Chairman Smith & Indiana Congressional Delegation:
In light of the publicly announced decision on Wednesday by putative President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder to cease enforcement of the duly enacted Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), I respectfully ask you to initiate and support impeachment charges against both men.
Article II, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution requires presidents to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed”. DOMA is legislation that was passed in bipartisan fashion by 80% of the 104th Congress and signed into law by then President Clinton. There is not a shred of unconstitutionality in that law since it, contrary to points made in a letter by A/G Holder to Speaker John Boehner, does not discriminate against anyone from having access to the institution.
A deliberate intent to avoid and evade enforcement of this law, like any other, sends a message that the Constitution be damned. Mr. Obama and Mr. Holder cannot cherry pick which laws they will defend and which they won’t. To do so is a serious breach of constitutional fidelity that, if not quickly remedied, warrants impeachment and removal from office. It borders on treason since refusal equates to a blatant dereliction to defend America in all respects and on all fronts. It has crossed the proverbial line.
Should a president find a law unconstitutional, it is up to him to go to Congress and ask lawmakers to repeal such a law. Since Obama has not asked Congress to repeal DOMA and since Congress has not addressed it since enactment in 1996, this administration has an obligation to vigorously defend it until and if Congress does repeal it. This was how Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was rescinded, although the decision to repeal was a terrible one. But at least the proper procedures were followed. Such is not the case with DOMA.
The Obama Administration is already on record for failing to enforce federal immigration laws and is instead suing the state of Arizona for its courageous decision to do what the feds won’t. Adding its willful failure to enforce DOMA as well as a refusal to abide by a Florida judge’s decision striking down Obamacare, a pattern of lawlessness is steadily emerging here. And along those lines, since he cannot get such legislation approved by Congress, there are plenty of rumblings among some of its members that Obama is set to issue an executive order to grant amnesty to the millions of illegal aliens already here. We cannot wait for that to occur. Obama and Holder’s blatant disregard for current statute already more than qualifies for their removal from office.
A willful refusal to support a law on the books because it conflicts with one’s own personal agenda appears to be a solid ground for impeachment, per Article II, Section 4. If refusing to enforce DOMA does not amount to treason, it certainly qualifies under the category of high crimes and misdemeanors since it is a blunt abrogation of constitutional duty from the highest public officer in America. It sends a message that lawbreaking is permissible, depending on one’s own whims and views. This cannot be allowed to stand. It is why I ask you to do your solemn duty, without partisan politics and wrangling, to start the constitutional process of removing Barack Obama and Eric Holder from power without delay.
The American people are seeking leadership here and we pray you provide it. Thank you.
Your City, State, Zip
Your e-mail address (optional)
Obviously, you will want to put the names of all your state’s Republican Congressmen and women at the top of your letter (names and fax numbers can be located here). Again, feel free to modify any of the above, but should you feel the need to do so, please keep your letter to a max of 2 pages. You may also wish to call all these Congressmen, but regardless, they need to hear from you in writing. Fax is obviously faster than snail mail but regardless, it is important that your thoughts be put on paper.
Do NOT e-mail, I repeat do NOT e-mail as your messages may possibly not be read, they may be deleted or go into unmonitored accounts.
And if you have the financial means to overnight letters to Chairman Smith and all the Republicans in your state, by all means do so.
Please spread this message very far and wide. Only when literally millions of Americans speak out will Congress even think of acting. We must speak out like never before. If you forward no other link or e-mail of mine, please, for God and country and your family, get this one out. Obama and Holder must be removed without delay.
Please, readers, I beg of you to not ignore this plea. Our nation’s survival now depends on giving Obama the boot. Your actions or inaction will determine whether we continue to have a country and republic or a dictatorship and continued lawlessness.
And lastly, I want every reader to sign this petition to Rep. Smith and all House Republicans. I want you to spread the word on this petition and get into as many e-mail hands as possible. If there are people you normally don’t forward political items to, this is one you absolutely must, that is if you and they care about God, country, family and future. If the U.S. House refuses to do its job without being told, then it’s time we crack the whip and make them do it. This needs to go viral across America more than anything else right now.
Any questions, comments, concerns or need for assistance, e-mail me at email@example.com. Thank you in advance for your due consideration and may God bless and save America before it’s too late.