Standing up against evil

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Saturday, November 24, 2001 | Jerry Falwell

[JohnHuang2]

---

Standing up against evil

---

© 2001 WorldNetDaily.com

Following my report last week on the Salvation Army's decision to rescind an order to offer health benefits for "domestic partners" or "one-domiciled adults" in 13 Western states, I have learned that homosexual-rights groups have threatened to picket and fill the organization's Red Kettle with "notes of protest" during this holiday season.

A source within the organization told a member of my staff that the organization has been "put on notice" by homosexual groups who have also threatened to block access to the Salvation Army kettles across the country.

Homosexuals are incensed that the Salvation Army's Commissioners' Conference announced a decision to maintain the current level of health benefits to employees' spouses and dependent children, thereby nullifying a plan by its Western Territory to enact a benefits program that would have allowed single adults – including homosexuals – to purchase insurance.

"[The decision] establishes the organization as anti-gay, and in a country that's yearning to come together and heal, this was an extremely divisive move that I don't think will be looked on kindly," said David Smith, a spokesman for the Human Rights Campaign.

But the Salvation Army is far from "anti-gay." The Salvation Army – just like Jerry Falwell Ministries – is committed to preaching the Gospel of Christ and to meeting human needs in His name without discrimination. This means the organization is committed to helping people regardless of their race, creed, religion or even sexual preference. Just as Christ reached out to all, so too must we as we represent Him.

Last week, Commissioner Lawrence Moretz explained, "We will not sign any government contract or any other funding contracts that contain domestic-partner benefit requirements." Because the Commissioner's Conference issued its difficult decision, the organization stands to lose unimaginable amounts of government funds.

The organization's biblical foundations were ultimately more important than its funding, and the organization, in Mr. Moretz' words, is "prayerfully accept[ing] the challenge to seek funding and continue our ministry that will not compromise any of our principles."

I want to encourage all my readers to visit the Salvation Army website and make a donation to this exemplary organization that is committed to sharing the love of Jesus Christ and helping our fellow man. (Click on "Donate Online" to make a contribution.)

Free speech? Yes, but some have to fight for it

On Friday, Sept. 14, a female high-school student arrived at her Malone, N.Y., school wearing a sweatshirt she had worn on several other occasions. The front of the sweatshirt bore the message: "Abortion is Homicide." The back of the sweatshirt read: "You will not silence my message. You will not mock my God. You will stop killing my generation." The shirt is produced by the pro-life organization Rock for Life, which encourages students to wear the garments to school in order to promote the pro-life cause.

Even though this young lady said she had received a number of positive responses to the sweatshirt, on this day she was told to either put on a different shirt or go home. The reason? The shirt was "offensive." She was placed on in-school suspension until her father came to school to pick her up because she refused to don a different shirt.

Thankfully, the Ann Arbor, Mich.-based Thomas More Law Center stepped in and successfully intervened on her behalf. Center attorney Edward L. White III sent a letter to the Malone Central School District superintendent explaining the student's constitutional right to wear the pro-life sweatshirt and demanded written assurance that the school would no longer interfere with the girl's right to wear her sweatshirt, as well as a written apology.

However, the district continued to prohibit the student from wearing her sweatshirt, citing a new reason – the shirt was deemed to convey a religious message, thereby constituting religious proselytizing. The school's lawyer argued that students may not proselytize a specific religious viewpoint in school.

It never ceases to amaze me how some school officials – apparently convinced that they are on a moral mission to prevent any religious message from sneaking into their schools – will go to such great lengths to persecute students whose beliefs may run counter to today's politically correct ideals. (If such schools truly want to embrace "diversity," how then do they justify extinguishing the beliefs of pro-life students or cutting off the rights of religious students to meet on campus?)

School officials in this case quickly discovered they were in the wrong. The Thomas More Center reported that officials made a dramatic turnaround after Mr. White explained that not only do court decisions contradict the district's decision to stifle religious speech, but even the U.S. Department of Education's guidelines – which every school district has received – permit students to display religious messages on clothing to the same extent that students are permitted to display other comparable messages. The school district apologetically dictated a written promise that the student would be allowed to wear her pro-life sweatshirt to school.

Just as religious students are to have equal access to school facilities, they must not be prevented from expressing their faith or faith-related beliefs. Millions of unborn babies have been slaughtered in this nation, and this young lady should have the right to freely voice her outrage at this unspeakable holocaust. People should not be offended by this girl's shirt – they should be offended that our nation has authorized the annihilation of more than 40 million innocent lives.

The so-called "religious right" is frequently accused of being censorship-minded, but this case shows the opposite to be true. Religious students in this nation are habitually harassed and punished solely because of their expressed faith.

I thank God for courageous young people like this young lady in upstate New York. I encourage pro-life public-school students across this nation to start wearing their pro-life clothing to school.

It's time we all started standing up and being counted in the critical battle for the unborn.

[JohnHuang2]

Quote of the Day by mombonn

[pcl]

But the Salvation Army is far from "anti-gay." The Salvation Army – just like Jerry Falwell Ministries – is committed to preaching the Gospel of Christ and to meeting human needs in His name without discrimination. We will not sign any government contract or any other funding contracts that contain domestic-partner benefit requirements

Boil, boil, boil, toil and trouble. Black is white and white is black.

I think the Salvation Army is practicing witchcraft.

[pcl]

I encourage pro-life public-school students across this nation to start wearing their pro-life clothing to school.

Good idea. Then the Pro-choicers will start wearing their clothing. Soon the kids will be forgetting about learning their ABCs and debating highly emotional issues instead.

I am glad my kids are homechooled so they are not subjected to this garbage.

[RobertBauman]

Falwell has guts to still be standing up to the homosexual crowd. It seems since Sept 11th, they have gotten especially vulgar.

[Fiddlstix]

Bump

[JCG]

I think the Salvation Army is practicing witchcraft.

In what regard, sweetheart?

America's Fifth Column ... watch PBS documentary JIHAD! In America
Download 8 Mb zip file here (50 minute video)

[pcl]

The salvation army says "we are not anti-gay"<>P The salvation army says "we not support gay partnerships."

They are saying white is black and black it white. This is what Shakespere claims witches do in Hamlet.

BTW: I have watched that Jihad in America netcast. I was frightening. Just as frightening is the world wide Jihad.

[Kevin Curry]

The pro-perversion crowd has scored all its easy victories. It will get tough--very tough--for them from here on out.

The Boy Scouts, Salvation Army, and most conservative Christian churches are still standing firm against evil while the weak-willed and easily intimidated have collapsed and fallen into the sewer of sexual anomie and moral decadence.

Let the demon brood howl. By God's own power, a remnant shall always withstand them and, in the end, prevail.

[JCG]

The salvation army says "we are not anti-gay"<>P The salvation army says "we not support gay partnerships."

They are saying white is black and black it white. This is what Shakespere claims witches do in Hamlet.

It took me awhile to see where you're coming from -- or where you're going with this.  That is, until I took a ramble through your FReeper page where I found this:

I support the right of homosexuals to live in peace in our society. I do not support public perversion by either   heterosexuals or homosexuals.

So, tell me, does your "support(ing) the right" include the right to beat up on the Boy Scouts of America?  Does it include the right of lesbians to teach "fisting" and "felching" techniques to junior high students as they did in Massachusetts recently?  Does it include Andrew Sullivan's right to advertise in gay newspapers for partners to engage in unprotected sex, thus increasing the possibility of AIDS victims?

I'm afraid you won't find much warm and fuzzy feeling for homos -- or newbie seminar posters -- on this Web site.

America's Fifth Column ... watch PBS documentary JIHAD! In America
Download 8 Mb zip file here (50 minute video)

[pcl]

So, tell me, does your "support(ing) the right" include the right to beat up on the Boy Scouts of America? No

Does it include the right of lesbians to teach "fisting" and "felching" techniques to junior high students as they did in Massachusetts recently? No

Does it include Andrew Sullivan's right to advertise in gay newspapers for partners to engage in unprotected sex, thus increasing the possibility of AIDS victims? Yes, but I do not agree with premise. Who is Andres Sullican?

I'm afraid you won't find much warm and fuzzy feeling for homos on this Web site. Will I find hate mongering?

[pcl]

I just did a search for Andrew Sullivan on the net. It appears you have misrepresented him in your posting. You said

advertise in gay newspapers for partners to engage in unprotected sex, thus increasing the possibility of AIDS victims?

This makes it sounds like he put an advertisement in a gay newspaper declaring that gays partners should have unprotected sex. That he was encouraging other people to do this. If this were the actual case, then I would have to say the First Ammendment gives him the right to do that. I would also have to say that it is a pretty stupid thing to do.

But that is not what happened. I could find no references to any newspaper ads. I did find a reference that said he advertised on AOL under a false name for a personal sex partner with whom he would have unprotected sex. Once again, I think it is pretty stupid of him to do that. Notwithstanding that, the whole issue is none of anyone's business but his own and his potential partners. He has as much right to seek this sort of partner just as the millions of stupid heterosexual men who seek unprotected sex with prostitutes and one night stands.

But there appears to be a bit more to the story. It seems that Mr. Sullivan is fairly well known author of gay articles. His articles criticize the reckless sexual practices of gay men. Since he is a well known advocate of safe sex, it does seem like his private sexual practices could and should be subjected to public criticism. This case is very similar to the well known nude pictures of Dr. Laura. In both cases, a hypocrite is being exposed. I do believe the public needs to know when their advocates are being hypocritical.

I thank you for the interesting pointer to Mr. Sullivan. I am allways pleased when hypocrites like him and Dr. Laura get their just rewards.

[JCG]

But that is not what happened. I could find no references to any newspaper ads. I did find a reference that said he advertised on AOL under a false name for a personal sex partner with whom he would have unprotected sex.

Like it makes a difference whether it was advertised in a  newspaper or on AOL?  The operative thought is that Sullivan advertised for unprotected homosexual sex -- something that frequently kills one or both partners.

But, c'mon homo boy, this isn't something that amounts to very much.  What about the other two points in my post?  What about the Boy Scout bashing and the lesbo indroctination of junior high school kids?

(Dr. Laura is a courageous, intelligent, saint.)

America's Fifth Column ... watch PBS documentary JIHAD! In America
Download 8 Mb zip file here (50 minute video)

[pcl]

c'mon homo boy

Sir, that is an insult that was not called for. If we were face to face, you would either retract that statement or one of us would hurt.

As far as your two other condescending questions, I answered them before by long post on Mr. Sullivan.

[JCG]

Sir, that is an insult that was not called for. If we were face to face, you would either retract that statement or one of us would hurt.

As far as your two other condescending questions, I answered them before by long post on Mr. Sullivan.

Looks like I erred twice in my reply to you for which I apologize.  You are not homosexual if you say you're not and you did answer the post -- I overlooked it.

You asked whether you would find hate mongering here.  In some cases you will.  More likely you will find reams of facts that you will not wish to entertain.

I was once like you, a dweller in the land of live and let live.  Then came the bashing of the BSA, Dr. Laura and  the Salvation Army; then came the perverted parades, the indoctrination of school children with tripe like "Heather Has Two Mommies" and the fisting seminar in Massachusetts; then came the demand for "domestic partner" benefits and same-sex marriages; and along with all of these came the AIDS menace which has sent a quarter-million Americans to the graveyard.

Finally I said to hell with it.  Gays are people who -- like Andrew Sullivan -- cannot be trusted to do the right thing.  They simply will not confine their activity to their own bedrooms.  Their goal is to destroy.   They wish nothing more fervently than to destroy the Boy Scouts, destroy Dr. Laura and destroy the Salvation Army.  When they complete those diabolical missions they will take on the churches.  They will not quit until every scrap of decency is gone from our land.  Then they will be just like the original Sodomites, free to enjoy their perverse pleasures without interference -- at least until the day of judgment.

This is the goal and they and their enablers need to be stopped.

(Dr. Laura is an intelligent, courageous, saint.)

America's Fifth Column ... watch PBS documentary JIHAD! In America
Download 8 Mb zip file here (50 minute video)

[pcl]

Apology accepted. I can assure you that if I am a homosexual, I have not yet found out about it.

I live in the San Francisco bay area thus I have been exposed to a lot more gay people and activities than the normal American. While there are some factions of the gays that do some very disturing things, I have never personally witnessed any of it despite my location.

I have also worked with gays in the work place. Over the years I have a number of gay males and females reporting to me in my organizations. Not one of these gay people ever acted in any way out order in the work place or in their private lives (from what I can tell). Many of them are in long term relationships. They did not go around hitting on people (unlike some of the heteros). They did not shove their sexual orientation in anyone's face. I wish all the heterosexual people I worked with were as well behaved as the gays. Through the years I have never fired a gay person for cause. I have fired at three heterosexuals (one female!) for sexual harrasment. I nearly fired one very vocal homophobe but he quit before the HR paper work caught up with him.

I also tend not to pay a whole lot of attention to gay activites, good or bad. Such activities just to do not register on my radar screen (unlike the activites of Gun Grabbers). I have heard some things about gays and Boy Scouts, but I could not give you many details. I had never heard Mr. Sullivan until you mentioned him. What does register on my radar screen is homophobic people. People who will persecute gays just because they are gay. In my mind, gays are people with feeling just like people of different races and nationalities. A person who would harrass a gay is no better than a person who would harrass a black person - in my mind.

I also allow the diverse people no special priviledges when it comes to breaking the law. Since I have been here on FR, I have learned of one gay web site that is slyly calling for the assination of certain people. I have learned of a Pro-life web site doing the same thing. Both of these are very, very wrong and equally wrong.

[JCG]

I live in the San Francisco bay area thus I have been exposed to a lot more gay people and activities than the normal American. While there are some factions of the gays that do some very disturing things, I have never personally witnessed any of it despite my location.

I also tend not to pay a whole lot of attention to gay activites, good or bad. Such activities just to do not register on my radar screen (unlike the activites of Gun Grabbers). I have heard some things about gays and Boy Scouts, but I could not give you many details.

You, like a lot of Americans, have been "desensitized" to what homosexuals do and what they hope to achieve.  This is because homosexuals have been very adept at propagandizing us with the nonsense that they're just nice folk, like us, wanting to live their lives the way they want to live.  While they make this spurious claim, they  work night and day to wreck some of the finest institutions this country has ever had -- the Boy Scouts, and, now, the Salvation Army.

As to individual homos, I have also encountered them in the work place and, likewise, I've never had a problem or been hit upon.  Does that mean they can be trusted to do the right thing at all times?  No, because while my money and support goes to organizations like the Salvation Army and Boy Scouts, theirs goes to Lambda, ACLU and other gay or gay-friendly organizations which work around the clock to destroy some of what's best in America.

They -- and their enablers -- have my eternal hostility.

(Dr. Laura is an intelligent, courageous, saint.)
 

America's Fifth Column ... watch PBS documentary JIHAD! In America
Download 8 Mb zip file here (50 minute video)

[pcl]

Dr. Laura is an intelligent, courageous,

No arguement there. She is also a hypocrite. I am note referring to her stand on homosexuals. I am referring to her "do as I say not do as I did" philosophy. Everyone is entitled to make mistake. We can generally forgive people for their past mistakes(*) if they appear to have reformed.

The thing that makes me label Dr. Laura as a hypocrite is the fact the she did not own up to the nude pictures upon publication. At first she denied, then she tried to surpress then she went silent and finally she confessed. She only confessed when left with no choice.

---- * If we are Republican we never forgive the past mistakes of any Democrat and vice vera if you are a Democrat.

[JCG]

The thing that makes me label Dr. Laura as a hypocrite is the fact the she did not own up to the nude pictures upon publication.

In my opinion, attempting to cover one's youthful indiscretions is not hipocrisy.  She was under no obligation to own up to 25-year-old pictures or anything else that had nothing to do with her present conduct.  It was as specious an accusation as the GWB drunk driving thing.  (Bill Clinton's draft dodging was something that did need to be admitted because he was running for public office, intending to become Commander In Chief of our military, on the basis of what he claimed was his record.  That was hypocrisy.)

I don't think Webster's (or in this case yourDictionary.com) supports your view, either -- unless she was continuing to do nude photos while claiming to be against them.

                          Main Entry: hy.poc.ri.sy
                          Pronunciation: hi-'pä-kr&-sE also hI-
                          Function: noun
                          Etymology: Middle English ypocrisie, from Old French, from Late Latin
                          hypocrisis, from Greek hypokrisis act of playing a part on the stage,
                          hypocrisy, from hypokrinesthai to answer, act on the stage, from hypo- +
                          krinein to decide -- more at CERTAIN
                          Date: 13th century
                          Inflected Form(s): plural -sies
                          1 : a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not;
                          especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion
                          2 : an act or instance of hypocrisy

America's Fifth Column ... watch PBS documentary JIHAD! In America
Download 8 Mb zip file here (50 minute video)