After years of intense pressure from the Left, the Boy Scouts of America’s National Council finally voted to allow openly homosexual young men in their ranks.  It was a disappointing decision, but not entirely surprising in light of the numerous other groups that have already bowed to the pressure of the homosexual lobby, though often with much less hoopla.

What perhaps makes this instance so searing and conspicuous is the degree to which the Boy Scouts have represented possibly the strongest moral standards of any high-profile American institution over the last century.  Since its founding, it has embodied the broad spectrum of traditional American values, even requiring each and every scout to be “reverent toward God” and “faithful in his religious duties.”  So when the Boy Scouts abandoned their long-standing policy on homosexuality, those of us who support marriage and sexuality as God intended were deeply saddened.

Making this concession is even more tragic, because few observers expect this decision to be the final word on the matter.  Further compromises to the advocates of homosexuality are almost surely on the way.  Indeed, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) released a statement directly on the heels of the Boy Scouts’ vote, stating, “As we celebrate this moment, we know the work isn’t complete. The Boy Scouts of America still discriminates against qualified adults who are denied the opportunity to participate in leadership positions because they are gay.”

Special-interest groups — including the NGLTF and the plethora of others like them — are actively working to transform our values and our culture by working to undermine our society’s historic beliefs on marriage and sexuality.  And clearly, they are not yet done.  They will continue pressing not only the Boy Scouts but also other organizations, companies, and legislatures to “modify” their deeply held views.

Hopefully, this unfortunate series of decisions from the Boy Scouts will serve as a wake-up call for churches, family-oriented groups, and people of faith to renew their efforts in support of Biblically defined marriage and sexuality.  Groups like the Boy Scouts that are under fire (and those who soon will be) need to know what you think about these issues and that you still care.  We ask that you stand by CWA and other like-minded organizations to broadcast loud and clear what you believe, reminding all involved that those who affirm Biblical Truth will not go down without a fight.

Let me ask you a question: Do you believe that marriage should be between one man and one woman? If your answer is “yes,” then you, dear reader, are a hate-mongering bigot — at least that is what the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a self-described “civil rights organization dedicated to fighting hate and bigotry,” would call you. The scary thing is, a chilling new FBI video begs the question: Who’s spewing hate?

Remember the Family Research Council (FRC) shooting last year? Floyd Lee Corkins, a disturbed 28-year-old man dressed as an intern walked into the FRC headquarters and shot FRC security guard Leo Johnson. Corkins has stated, “I wanted to kill the people in the building and then smear a Chick-Fil-A sandwich in their face … to kill as many people as I could.” Thanks to the heroic efforts of Johnson, Corkin’s deadly plot failed.

In the FBI video, an investigator asks, “How did you [come to] this building, this organization. Did you, how did you find it earlier?  Did you like look it up online?”  Corkins then admits, “It was a uh, Southern Poverty Law, lists, uh anti-gay groups.  I found them online.”

The FRC atrocity hits close to home for those of us at Concerned Women for America (CWA). FRC staff members are not only our allies in the pro-family battle, they are our close friends. These men and women are honest citizens with compassionate hearts and a career calling to uphold Christian values in public policy.  But these admirable qualities were conveniently overlooked by the SPLC when it deemed FRC a “hate group” on the basis that the organization respects the institution of marriage.

If any non-profit, business, or individual stands for the purity of marriage, the sanctity of unborn life, or the constitutional protection of religious freedom, then they are counted among SPLC’s “hate groups.”  In fact, the SPLC has named CWA as one of “a dozen major groups [that] help drive the Religious Right’s anti-gay crusade.”  Skeptical?  Then go to SPLC’s website and click on their “hate map.”

Even Bill Maher, the liberal HBO host known for his anti-conservative rants, doesn’t buy the notion that Christians are as “dangerous” as liberal society is attempting to paint us.  Maher invited Brian Levin, the director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University, on his show to discuss hate and violence as a result of religious institutions.  When Levin tried to argue that Jews and Christians commit terrorist acts, Maher retorted:

“Um that’s liberal bull****. … Talk to Salman Rushdie after the show about Christian versus Islam. … So, you know, I’m just saying, let’s keep it real.”

One can only hope that those who profit from this type of misinformation would “keep it real.”  But they are not interested in truth.  The SPLC knows Christians are not “hateful,” but they know they can exploit the sentiments of a significant part of the population for their obscene profit with minimal work.  By simply labeling them “hateful,” they hope to intimidate Christians into silence, whatever the unintended consequences.  The FRC incident actually helps the SPLC’s cause.

But Christians, including those of us at CWA, will not be intimidated.  And we will never tiptoe around certain Biblical principles or cherry-pick our moral values.  No amount of harassment, demeaning messages, or preposterous labeling will ever cause us to renounce our faith and forgo the Christian principles that laid the foundation for our nation and its success. Ever.  

Word comes from a middle school in New York that anti-bullying campaigns in the nation’s schools are being used to promote the homosexual agenda.  At Linden Avenue Middle School in Red Hook, New York, (near Poughkeepsie) students from nearby Bard College were brought in to lead anti-bullying workshops. The workshops, instead, focused on homosexuality and gender identity.  The students (divided by gender) were required to participate in exercises that made them uncomfortable, to use words unique to the promotion of homosexual/lesbian activity, and to participate in the workshop without parental knowledge or the opportunity to opt out.

When the 13- and 14-year-olds told their parents about the activities, parents were outraged.  Not only were the young students taught that sexual activity was normal and encouraged (in spite of the wealth of social science data showing the harmful effects of early sexual activity), but both the girls’ session and the boys’ session included offensive, immoral teaching and activities.  The students were taught when to use words like “pansexual” and “genderqueer.”  Christian News reported that parents complained about the school “overstepping its bounds in not notifying parents first and giving us the choice.”  Parents complained about the session being “inappropriate,” with such instruction “best left up to the parents.”

In the girls’ session, two girls were picked to stand at the front of the class and pretend that they were dating lesbians.  Others were required to ask another girl for a kiss.  In the boys’ session, the students were advised to “keep a condom in their pocket at all times.”  They were also taught (ironically in this age, where the use of the word “slut” can get someone in hot water very quickly), “how to identify a woman who is a ‘slut.’”

In the face of overwhelming parental objections, both the school principal and the district superintendent defended the workshops and told parents that more of such workshops will be scheduled in the future.

A news report in The Poughkeepsie Journal quoted Superintendent Paul Finch as saying that the presentation was “focused on improving culture, relationships, communication and self-perceptions.”  He noted that they “might be required” to notify parents in the future, but that the “Dignity for All Students Act” means that schools are required to hold sessions like the one drawing criticism.

The school superintendent also admitted that school guidance counselors and the school principal worked with the college students in planning the workshops.  Further, the school officials claimed that the sessions were designed to teach the students about “respect and safety.”

The Red Hook parents remain justifiably irate and livid over the sessions and the disregard for their parental rights.  Parents in the rest of the nation need to be just as irate and livid because these types of indoctrination programs — without parental knowledge or consent — are headed to all our schools under the guise of anti-bullying efforts.

They’ll call me a bigot, but I prefer to see myself as a realist.  So let’s jump into it.  The Today Show’s Jenna Wolfe dropped an unexpected bombshell into the national conversation over “gay marriage.”  She announced on air (and in her blog) that, “My girlfriend, Stephanie Gosk, and I are expecting a baby girl the end of August.”

First and foremost, I am pro-life.  Let’s just put that up front.  I love babies.  Children are life changing, and I’m sure Miss Wolfe is already finding that out.

However, I’m also like that little kid who yelled, “The king has no clothes!”  If there’s something to be said and no one wants to say it for fear of hurting the feelings of others, well, you’ll find me there.  Sorry to rain on your parade, but truth is truth.

So here we go.  The headline on the Today Show’s website starts out with the word “Surreal.”  But, in truth, it should read “Unreal.”  Jenna Wolfe and her girlfriend, Stephanie Gosk, are most certainly not expecting a baby girl at the end of August, not in the biological sense, anyway.

When a man and a woman unite in a sexual union, the woman provides the unfertilized egg and the man provides the sperm.  Those two things — biologically exclusive to members of the opposite sex — merge and the miracle of life begins.

So herein lies the crux of our dilemma: Miss Wolfe and Miss Gosk are both women.  That’s not an anti-“gay” statement; that’s a true statement.  Biologically speaking, they cannot, of their own volition, produce a child.  I’m sure they’re both nice women, but they need a man in order to have a baby.

And if they need a man in order to have a baby, then who can honestly say that this is the only contribution a man can make?  Who can honestly say that Miss Gosk can replace — truly and completely replace — the father who should be present in that child’s life?  Consider, if you will, all the social science data to date that shows that children do better in a traditional mom-and-dad household.  Which parent does the child not need?  A young lady asked that very question to a state legislature recently — “Which parent do I not need?” — and no one could answer her.

It may be politically correct to celebrate the news of Miss Wolfe’s pregnancy.  It may be politically correct to celebrate Miss Gosk’s role as the child’s “other parent.”  But it is selfish, and supremely so, to deny the child — and others like her — the benefit of either a mother or a father.  Two men cannot produce a child.  Two women cannot produce a child.  And neither of those familial arrangements is fair to the overall development of a child.

Don’t get me wrong.  I’m sure Miss Gosk will be supportive and loving and caring to Miss Wolfe’s child; but she will never be — can never be — the child’s father.  And, to me, that’s just sad.

Today’s guest blogger is Christian Shelby, a volunteer with Concerned Women for America.

The “Queen James Bible” seeks to smooth over God’s prohibitions against homosexual activity by acrobatic retranslation of key texts.

When Christians oppose the act of homosexuality and “same-sex marriage” based on our belief in the inerrant Word of God, the Bible, we are called “haters,” “bigots,” “homophobes” and “intolerant.” When we point to Scripture and say we believe God’s Word, we are called “ignorant.” That is what passes for “tolerance” in today’s culture.

Well, fear not, the tolerance brigade is out to level the playing field. The U.K. Daily Mail has an article about the “Queen James Bible” which re-works the King James Bible so that it “prevents homophobic misinterpretation of God’s Word.”

The unidentified editors of this new Bible version claim on the website that “No Bible is perfect …” and promote sales by saying, “You can’t choose your sexuality, but you can choose Jesus. Now you can choose a Bible, too.”

The website does not show specifically how they “fixed” the “imperfect” King James Bible, but supporters seem satisfied with the attempt, “The Queen James Bible seeks to resolve interpretive ambiguity in the Bible as it pertains to homosexuality: We edited those eight verses in a way that makes homophobic interpretations impossible.”

According to a post on First Things blog, here is a comparison between the King James Version of Leviticus 18:22 with the Queen James Version:

KJV:
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination.

QJV:
Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind in the temple of Molech: it is an abomination.

Not to be outdone on giving the world the impression that God supports homosexuality and all Bible translations preceding the Queen James just tried to hide the fact, St. Matthews-in-the-City, a controversial New Zealand church, has once again erected an offensive Christmas billboard.

This year’s billboard features Christ in the manger with a rainbow halo around his head with the message, “It’s Christmas. Time for Jesus to come out.” The church’s website quotes St. Matthew’s clergy, the Rev. Glynn Cardy and the Rev. Clay Nelson, “This year we invited discussion and debate on the sexual orientation of Jesus.” Last year, they had a billboard picturing the Virgin Mary looking at a pregnancy test, and the year before it portrayed Joseph and Mary in bed with the tagline, “Poor Joseph. God was a tough act to follow.”

It is difficult to fathom how the “gay” bible and a church’s outrageous billboards are not causing the media, Hollywood, and politicians to rush to the defense of Christians whose faith and God are under attack by intolerant bigots. Oh wait … that’s right … today’s culture is propped up by these so-called bastions of peace, love, and tolerance — and it’s the Christians who stir up all the trouble.

Have no fear, the federal government is here! Wait… that isn’t right.

I’m no damsel in distress, and neither are you. The days of a masked hero helping those in need are, so it seems, nonexistent. But that is exactly what’s unfolding before our very eyes.

The government wants to tell “we the people” how to live. Citizens, if you think politics won’t directly affect you, think again.  New York City’s mayor decided to ban sugary drink sizes to 16 ounces, putting a limit on buying soda in order to thin out an obese New York populace.  Michelle “The Lunch Lady” Obama has implemented an Orwellian lunch program to regulate what American children can and cannot eat, and health (for the mother, not for the abortion-targeted baby) mandates are being shoved down citizens’ throats despite how deeply they offend citizens’ religious convictions.

And it doesn’t stop there.  As if forcing you to pay for abortions weren’t enough, Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius blatantly ignored — and arrogantly violated — federal law by using her Cabinet position to tell Americans to vote for President Obama.

Where are the outraged media elites?  Where’s the lone, masked hero who fights against those who abuse their power?  As you’ve heard, time and time again, this election is one of the most important elections of our life time.  We cannot allow our government to keep implementing laws that go against “we the people.”

Americans, listen up!  If you want a government that will cater to your every need, you’re living in the wrong country.  This country — the one built on freedom and liberty, bought by the blood and sweat of our ancestors, and lusted after by the rest of the world — is not a country of equal handouts, but of equal opportunity to work hard to achieve our ambitions.  Yet, that is not what we are seeing.  Instead, we have an administration that has implemented more federal control over American citizens’ everyday lives, and what are Americans doing about it?  Nothing!

It’s the American citizens’ choice, but I urge you to take a good, hard look.  It’s time to bring our country back to its founding.  Ben Franklin once said, “It is a republic, if we can keep it.”  So, I ask, can we?

Concerned Women for America (CWA) is doing what it takes to keep our government accountable to the taxpayers.  CWA’s She Votes 2012 project is working to make sure Americans are registered to vote in this extremely important election.  Are you ready?  Are you registered?  With voter registration ending on October 8 in most states, now is not the time to idly wonder.  Click here now to see if you’re registered. … And if you aren’t, stay on the site and do something about it.

Would you spray paint slurs on your walls, carve derogatory words into your own skin, and set your house on fire?  According to the New York Daily News, you might if you were Charlie Rogers.  In a sad and bizarre turn of events, Rogers — a lesbian activist in Lincoln, Nebraska — was arrested on Tuesday for filing false reports of a “hate crime” on July 22.

The “attack” occurred during the height of a battle over Lincoln’s “fairness ordinance,” a euphemism for a law that grants special rights to homosexuals under the guise of “banning discrimination,” often to the detriment of religious freedom and free speech.  “So maybe I am too idealistic,” Rogers posted on her Facebook page four days before the incident, “but I believe way deep inside me that we can make things better for everyone. I will be a catalyst. I will do what it takes. I will. Watch me.”

That post, coupled with other sketchy details — a tidy, unbloodied bed where the attack supposedly took place; a pile of clothes, gloves, and a box cutter bearing copious amounts of Rogers’ DNA, but no one else’s; and a forensic pathology report that says the cuts on her body were “superficial, symmetrical, avoided sensitive areas of the body, appear that they would have taken considerable time to do and are accessible to the victim and follow the victim’s frame of reference” — led to the charges against Rogers.

A statement by homosexual activist groups released after Rogers’ arrest urged residents to continue their fight against violence and hate.  But how hard is that to do when the violence and hate is perpetrated by the very people you’re supposed to be protecting?

Charlie, your sexual lifestyle — the behavior in which you are currently engaged — may feel natural, but it’s not.  It’s harmful to you, and it’s harmful to your soul.  This life is a shadow, and the whole of eternity lies ahead of you — and none of us wants you on the wrong side of eternity.

I know a woman who was once like you.  She was 100% interested in women and held no sexual interest for men.  But she changed; more accurately, she allowed God to change her.  (And before you call “Garbage” on me, see it from my point of view.  If God can part the Red Sea, can He not change and heal a human heart?)

My friend is happily married today — yes, to a man — and she has blessed the world with two beautiful girls who would otherwise not be here if she’d remained trapped in her belief that she was a lesbian and couldn’t change.

The modern idea that you’re born homosexual and can’t change simply is not supported by science.  The “gay gene” hasn’t been found and never will be; and none of the studies touted by homosexual activist groups have ever been replicated with believable results.

“Born that way” is a lie, and when we pass “fairness ordinances” to protect homosexuals — laws which, by the way, should protect all citizens, regardless of who they sleep with — all we really do is reinforce that lie and make it infinitely harder for folks like my friend to leave a dangerous and morally scarring lifestyle.

That may seem hateful to you, and from your viewpoint, I can see how it would.  But isn’t it more hateful to withhold the truth and never let you know that you can change?  I — and millions of others like me — think so.

So hate me.  Slander me.  Paint me as a bigot.  Regardless, I will love you by telling you the truth.  You can change, Charlie.  Whether you do or not is up to you, but you really should give it a try.

Our guest blogger today is Christian Shelby, a volunteer with Concerned Women for America.

August 1: The staff of Concerned Women for America shares a Chick-fil-A lunch in the staff meeting room.

When we stopped on the way to work for breakfast at Chick-fil-A this morning, there was a long line both inside the fast-food restaurant and at the drive thru.  One Facebook friend asked, “Are there enough chickens in the world to feed all the people who will be at Chick-fil-A on Wednesday?”  Good question.  On my Facebook newsfeed, there are half-a-dozen pictures of long lines at the 1,615 locations across the U.S.  Why are all those thousands of people flocking to Chick-fil-A on this first day of August?

Chick-fil-A is standing firm in its support of traditional marriage after President Dan Cathy told the Baptist Press that the company was “very much supportive of the family — the Biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that.”

Of course, Mr. Cathy did not say anything that most Americans didn’t already know.  It is well-known that Chick-fil-A is closed on Sunday, because of the Cathy family’s observance of the Sabbath and their desire to run their business according to Biblical principles. It is also well-known that the Cathy family’s views are shared by the majority of Americans.  Even President Barack Obama publicly supported traditional marriage until recently — ironically, until his re-election campaign began to heat up and he needed the support of his leftist political base and the enthusiastic support of those who are pushing the homosexual agenda and “same-sex marriage.”

Typically, the homosexual “rights” groups are going ballistic over Mr. Cathy’s remarks — calling for a boycott of Chick-fil-A, crying “homophobia,” “bigotry,” and “discrimination.”  But, facts are facts, and Chick-fil-A is well-known for treating its employees well and providing excellent service to anyone and everyone who comes into their restaurants.  In addition, they provide close to $2 million annually in college scholarships for their employees.  They also give back to the nation through their WinShape Foundation, providing camp experiences and assistance to disadvantaged, handicapped, and foster-care children and retreats for couples and families who are in crisis or have specific needs.  Plus, Mr. Cathy is an American and entitled to express his views anytime and anywhere he wants.  It is the First Amendment right of every American citizen; we have freedom of religion and freedom of speech.

None of that matters to those who single-mindedly demand not just the right, which they already have, but society’s approval for their lifestyle choices.  Leftist politicians have jumped on the bandwagon, with various mayors getting their 15-minutes of media attention, as they pontificate about there being “no place for discrimination” (Boston Mayor Tom Menino) or that “Chick-fil-A values are not Chicago values” (Mayor Rahm Emanuel).  Various companies are vying for the limelight, too.  Most notably, the Jim Henson Company broke ties with Chick-fil-A and will not only cease to provide toys for kids’ meals, they decided to twist the knife and are directing the revenue from the toys to GLAAD, a leading homosexual activist organization.

An Atlanta coed went public with her claim that she chose her university in part because it had an on-campus Chick-fil-A restaurant, but several campuses — Northeastern University, Indiana University, and New York University — are protesting the presence of the restaurants on their grounds.

The Left can protest; they, too, have the right to hold their own beliefs, express their values, and state their views.  Politicians can bluster, and those in governmental leadership positions can try — unconstitutionally — to stop freedom of speech and religion.  While the Left is harassing Christians, those who uphold America’s First Amendment rights may have the last word as they stand in long lines to buy their chicken sandwiches.  And, Chick-fil-A may have the last cluck.

It should come as no surprise that President Obama is already gearing up to translate his official endorsement of “gay marriage” into support for his campaign for reelection.  The campaign announced Wednesday the launch of the “Obama Pride: LGBT Americans for Obama” initiative to raise publicity and funds for the president’s 2012 bid.  The campaign will promote events across the nation, including phone banks, information distribution, local activist meetings, and voter registration drives.

With the NAACP now officially endorsing the president on his position regarding “gay marriage,” the Obama campaign is seeking to leverage his advantage with the LGBT community and like-minded individuals in key battleground states.  Not surprisingly, California will be a major focus for “Obama Pride,” but Politico reports that pivotal states, such as Colorado, Michigan, Nevada, and Pennsylvania will also receive extensive attention.

The Web page for “Obama Pride” openly boasts about the president’s long record of supporting the homosexual agenda since he was elected, touting more than forty of the administration’s top “accomplishments” on this front over the last three years.  A prominently displayed quote from the president says it all: “The work that we’ve done with respect to the LGBT community I think is just profoundly American and is at the heart of who we are.”

Whether or not the president’s pro-LGBT policies genuinely resonate with the average American (there is ample evidence suggesting they don’t), it is clear the president thinks the entire nation ought to agree with him.  This peculiar reasoning has apparently proved to be enough of a mandate for the administration to charge ahead in favor of the LGBT agenda, regardless of the morality of such policies and the actual will of the American people.

The National Encyclopedia building at Ångbåtsbron in Malmö (Sweden).

Right after International Women’s Day, a new pronoun, “hen,” was added to the online version of Sweden’s National Encyclopedia.  The entry defines hen as a “proposed gender-neutral personal pronoun instead of he [han in Swedish] and she [hon].”  A heated debate was sparked by the publication of Sweden’s first ever gender-neutral children’s book, Kivi och Monsterhund (Kivi and Monsterdog). It tells the story of Kivi, who wants a dog for “hen’s” birthday.

Sweden takes pride in being “the best country to deal with gender equality.”  What they are doing, however, is more than creating gender equality or gender neutrality; the measures they are instituting completely eliminate gender distinction.

Social Democrat politicians have proposed installing gender-neutral restrooms, so that members of the public will not be compelled to categorize themselves as either ladies or gents.  Several preschools have banished references to pupils’ genders, instead referring to children by their first names or as “buddies.”  So, a teacher would say “good morning, buddies” or “good morning, Lisa, Tom, and Jack” rather than, “good morning, boys and girls.”  They believe this fulfills the national curriculum’s guideline that preschools should “counteract traditional gender patterns and gender roles” and give girls and boys “the same opportunities to test and develop abilities and interests without being limited by stereotypical gender roles.”

According to Slate, one clothing store in Sweden got rid of its “boys” and “girls” sections, and a Swedish toy company, Leklust, has received attention for reversing the typical gender roles in its latest catalog — a boy in a Spiderman costume is pictured pushing a pink baby carriage, and a girl outfitted in denim is riding a tractor.  Boys will be allowed to have names like “Lisa,” and girls will have names like “Nick.”  The Swedish Bowling Association has announced plans to merge male and female bowling tournaments in order to make the sport gender-neutral — all will be unisex.

Jan Guillou, one of the country’s well-known authors, declared that the pronoun “hen” is “silly, because it doesn’t change anything. … And I don’t think that my gender has anything to do with my equality because that is a political matter,” she said in an interview.  She referred to gender-neutral lobbyists as “feminist activists who want to destroy our language.”  Others have suggested this new initiative could be both psychologically and socially damaging for Sweden’s children.

Elise Claeson, a columnist and a former equality expert at the Swedish Confederation of Professions, worried that school-aged children would become confused by talks of a third gender, the one referred to as “hen,” at a time when they are developing both physically and mentally.  “Adults should not interrupt children’s discovery of their gender and sexuality,” Claeson insists.

In the kindergartens in Sweden, when pupils play house, they are encouraged to include “mommy, daddy, child” in their imaginary families, as well as “daddy, daddy, child”; “mommy, mommy, child”; “daddy, daddy, sister, aunty, child”; or any other modern combination.  This indicates that the Swedish social engineers not only want to educate children about gender neutrality, but they also want to teach children that homosexual families are acceptable, with a goal of eventually being an approved part of mainstream culture.

While the goal of teaching children to treat people equally is laudable (and Biblical), it is just as important to teach them that gender differences are natural, God-given traits that people are meant to celebrate, not repress.