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.

How would you feel if your daughter’s or sister’s boyfriend got her pregnant and then tricked her into taking an abortion-inducing pill?  You should take the question seriously, because this is exactly what happened recently to a young woman in Tampa, Florida.  The boyfriend responsible for forcing the miscarriage of his own child is now being charged with murder.

Make no mistake, though.  Unless we all take stand against this sort of behavior — starting with young men like myself — this type of sad story is likely to repeat itself with growing frequency across America as the administration, liberal courts, and special interest groups (all of whom purportedly support “women’s reproductive health”) pursue their commitment to make contraceptives and abortion drugs more widely available to women at an increasingly young age.  The recent ruling by federal judge Edward R. Korman — ordering the availability of the powerful “emergency contraceptive” pill known as Plan B to women of all ages — will enable situations like this to occur again far too easily.  Specifically, it reduces barriers for so-called boyfriends to simply walk into a pharmacy and acquire powerful, abortion-inducing drugs to use on their girlfriends, no questions asked.

Pimps and rapists have, for many years, abused the over-abundance of contraceptives — thanks in part to groups like Planned Parenthood — to prevent the pregnancies of their prostitutes.  Consequently, pimps can keep even their youngest victims “in business” without inconvenient questions being asked.  Making powerful and potentially dangerous drugs like Plan B even more widely available will only exacerbate the problem.  As CWA’s Dr. Janice Crouse writes:

Judge Korman is a sex abuser’s dream and a victim’s nightmare. Essentially, he creates a brand new avenue for pimps, sex traffickers, and sex predators hoping to hide the evidence of their exploitation. We are removing doctors’ examinations, one of the vital tools used to detect sexual abuse. Now, a young girl afraid she might be pregnant at the hands of her abuser will not have the opportunity to see a doctor who could offer help and protection. Instead, her abuser will feed her Plan B like it is candy. In Thailand, where the morning-after pill has been freely available since 1988, men are the largest purchasers. What is wrong with this picture? It is no secret why Thailand is considered the world’s hot spot for sex trafficking of minors.

As a young guy, I would hate to see a family member or friend coerced, manipulated, or misused, and I suspect you probably feel the same way. Twenty-something guys who oppose victimizing women need to take back the sex culture and remind both society and our leaders that it is unacceptable to treat the ladies we care about like prostitutes.  We must stand up to keep them from becoming victims of the ever-growing sex industry, enablers like Planned Parenthood, and abusive boyfriends.

However much we’d like to deny it, the truth is that young men in my age bracket have far too easy of a time acquiring the tools they need to commit atrocities like the forced miscarriage of an innocent child in Tampa.  Thanks to the efforts of liberal “reproductive health” advocates, you and I need not only keep an eye out for the traffickers, pimps, and rapists — the deceptive boyfriend has now acquired the tools to victimize your daughter, little sister, or friend in the same way, to turn her into his own personal plaything.

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.

Do you ever wonder how the ancient Israelites frequently managed to mess up so badly?  Again and again, the Bible recounts their seeming inability to remember the basic commands repeated so many times in the early books of the Bible.

I recently read the speech that Joshua gave to the people of Israel before he died, urging them to be faithful to the Lord.  He reminded the entire assembly, one last time, about the benefits of obedience and the consequences of choosing sin:

Now therefore, fear the Lord, serve Him in sincerity and in truth, and put away the gods which your fathers served on the other side of the River and in Egypt. Serve the Lord! And if it seems evil to you to serve the Lord, choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell.  But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord. (Joshua 24:14-15)

Israel as a whole responded by resolving to follow God.  And, for a while, they remained faithful.

But in Judges, the next book of the Bible, God’s chosen people start to waver.  Chapter 1 begins with the tribes of Reuben and Judah working together to drive their residual enemies from the Promised Land.  However, this account is immediately followed by a detailed listing of how the various tribes had failed to drive out all the foreign peoples from the land, as God commanded.

When I consider this account a little more deeply, I realize I can be the same way.  There are areas in which I fail to submit to God entirely in my own life, and there are basic commands I can all too easily “forget” when convenient.

As I’m sure the Israelites did, I can come up with excuses about why I shouldn’t obey.  This very problem is addressed by Dietrich Bonheoffer in The Cost of Discipleship:

“When Jesus demanded voluntary poverty of the rich young man, the young man knew that his only choices were obedience or disobedience. When Levi was called from tax collecting and Peter from his nets, there was no doubt that Jesus was serious about those calls.  They were supposed to leave everything and follow him.  When Peter was called to step onto the stormy sea, he had to get up and risk taking the step.  Only one thing was demanded in each of these cases.  That was their entrusting themselves to the word of Jesus Christ, believing it to be a stronger foundation than all the securities of the world. … Simple obedience was required.”

A dose of reality, isn’t it?  For the original disciples (who were literally and verbally called by Christ) and for the first generation Israelites (whom God led into the Promised Land), there was no denying the reality of God’s will for their lives.  They were reminded of their God-given mission day in and day out.

In the same way, Christ followers must be reminded every day of God’s truth.  If we are not intentional about allowing the Word to speak into our lives, we start sliding down the slippery slope toward disobedience.

As John Owen has often said, “Be killing sin or sin will be killing you.”  Our souls must be consistently treated with heavy doses of Biblical truth — personally and in community — to remain healthy Christians.  Otherwise, we are doomed to lose our fight against sin.

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.

But unborn children need you more.

I thought it would be a lazy Tuesday morning; I thought everything would go smoothly.  But then, “You’ve got Mail!”  And, well, I’ll let you read it for yourself:

“There won’t be as many babies killed this year, but the slaughter is still moving forward.  We have made big strides, but our work isn’t finished yet! … 2013 must be the last year that the … slaughter takes place — and with your help, we can save … lives.  Please donate now — help us stop the senseless slaughter. … Unless something changes, without more help from … defenders like you, this horror will occur again.  Please donate today so that we can ramp up our campaign to stop the slaughter.  This massacre is a terrible price to pay. …”

Despite what you may think, this isn’t from any of the pro-life groups with which you’re familiar.  However, it is a pro-life message … for baby seals.

Don’t get me wrong; I love the adorable baby seals just as much as anyone else, but the Left’s obsession with saving anything but human babies is beginning to wear my patience thin.  I’m tired of hearing the women of my generation being urged to give up their world in order to “save the earth” — “courageously” killing our future in the name of “freedom of choice.”  I’m also tired of hearing about women like 29-year-old Jennifer Morbelli walking into abortion clinics and dying days later from “complications” after having their late-term children ripped from their wombs.

Over 4,000 children are aborted each day in America — over 4,000 children crying, screaming — no, shrieking in horror — for a chance at the same life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that the Left has twisted into a license to kill.  Over 4,000 children a day.  Is this not a “senseless slaughter”?  Is this, too, not a “massacre” in the truest sense of the word?

Groups like PETA bemoan the slaughter of baby seals and condemn the women who wear the furs.  But Left-leaning groups support the slaughter of innocent human children and ignore the women who are forced to wear their decision to abort on their hearts and consciences for the rest of their lives.

Where, oh liberal Left, is your compassion?

This hypocrisy — this cultural insanity — is what first drove me to work with groups like Concerned Women for America (CWA), which was founded after Beverly LaHaye heard NOW’s founder, Betty Friedan, claim to speak for the women of America.

Like me, Beverly knew this Leftist woman didn’t represent her beliefs or those of the vast majority of women.  And they still don’t.  NOW … NARAL … Planned Parenthood and the rest. … They don’t speak for me.  They don’t think for me.

And they shouldn’t speak or think for you.

It’s time to rise up, ladies.  It’s time to stand and take the microphone back from loudmouthed, liberal feminists who hate children.

It’s time to stand with Concerned Women for America.

Seal the deal.  Donate here.  But for pity’s sake, don’t just throw money at the problem.  Get involved in a state chapter of CWA or, if you’re in college, check out Young Women for America.  But whatever you do, do it today.  Because, “unless something changes,” the horror of abortion will occur again … and again … and again.

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

Let me just come out and state the obvious: Beyoncé is a talented superstar, but she is also a trashy performer and contributes to the crudity and vulgarity that permeates today’s cultural scene.  In spite of an appearance at President Obama’s second inaugural, which lamentably gave her a respectable aura and a “sort-of-official” stamp of approval, her performance at the Super Bowl is far more typical of her “appeal.”  A quick perusal of pictures that have gone viral from her Super Bowl performance show the anger, crudity, and vulgarity of her performance.

I realize we live in different times, but think back to Lena Horn and Ella Fitzgerald to provide evidence of how far today’s performers have fallen from the class that used to be an essential characteristic of singing stars.  Beyoncé missed a wonderful opportunity at the Super Bowl to elevate popular culture, that she is capable of showing some of the class, and bring some family-friendly entertainment to the Super Bowl, instead of continuing the downward spiral that is so destructive in popular culture.

Beyoncé has always mixed glamour with her trashy look and her music, which has led to confusion about who exactly she is.  On the one hand, she claims to be a Christian, and on the other she is intentionally vulgar in her language and dress.  She is praised for her traditional values about sex, relationships, and family; she is a hard worker and is multi-talented.  Her defenders claim that she is sexy in a classy, tasteful way.  I would argue that they haven’t looked at the pictures very closely.

Obviously, sexy is here to stay, but there is healthy sexuality — that which is naturally exuded — and unhealthy sexuality that is exploitative, flaunting, and deliberately and vulgarly provocative.  Case in point: Beyoncé is on the cover of a recent GQ magazine in a provocative pose, wearing the skimpiest of bikini panties and a cut-off t-shirt that exposes as much as it covers.

Beyoncé is beautiful, talented, and blessed with tremendous influence, but like so many others, she is using the excuse of “artistry” as she takes herself and her fans down instead of lifting them up.  In her Fall-Winter ad campaign for the House of Deréon, the pop star goes for the “biker chick” look with lots of tattoos, partial nudity, and crude poses.  In addition, she joined her mother to launch a kid’s fashion line that spreads the “hooker style” clothing down to toddlers (some reports claim the line was quietly discontinued in December 2012).  In some of her videos, Beyoncé uses gutter language and some critics claim that she is too willing to “go with the flow” to seem “with it” and “cool.”

Her sister, Solange Knowles, who is the designer behind many of the styles that made Destiny’s Child singers (Beyoncé’s original singing group and the back-up singers at her Super Bowl performance) so fashionable, is said to be worried about Beyoncé’s descent into the world of “tacky,” “flashy,” and “lowbrow.”  So, it is not prudish (to anticipate all the criticism bound to come from this article) to hold higher standards for today’s divas; they owe the public at least a facade of decency.

What do cupid and kids have in common?  Undies!  Yep, that’s right.  It’s hard to believe that the Children’s Tumor Foundation would associate its name with men in skivvies and women in lace — even for a million dollars.

Yet, the Children’s Tumor Foundation partners every year with the Cupids Undies “fun” run.  In Washington, D.C., this one-mile dash around the Capitol is apparently the event to be seen at, and it sells out every year.

The Cupids Undies Run national website says that while the run benefits kids, they hope they aren’t watching.  If that statement has to be on your website, surely you should reconsider the activity you are promoting.

Even more disturbing is that the run begins and ends at a bar.  The race organizers can’t possibly ignore how tawdry this appears.

It’s a bar crawl … in undies … for charity. 

Whether they are naughty or nice, the result is the same — unmentionables for charity.  But in our highly sexualized culture, I guess this “run” would be considered tame?

Learning about neurofibromatosis (NF) broke my heart.  Diseases that impact children, especially ones with no cures, are devastating to all of us.  As a mother, I could not imagine the frustration of seeing my child suffer helplessly.  Let’s be clear: Children with NF truly are heroes.  And I hope and pray a cure is around the corner!

Faced with the nature of NF, it is understandable that fundraisers want a lighthearted event that will raise oodles of money to help these kids and their families.  However, alcohol and near nudity is, more often than not, a recipe for making kids, rather than raising money for them.  Cupid’s Undies Run Founder Brendan Hanrahan should be reminded that, as our mothers always said, “Appearances still matter.”

In a year when the advertisements at the Super Bowl descended into what has become an annual cesspool of tastelessness and crudity, the “good” ads won with viewers. According to USA Today’s Ad Meter, viewers voted the “good” ads as the best Super Bowl XLVII commercials.

From highest to lowest scores of ads in the top 10:

7.76 –– Anheuser-Busch Horse and trainer reunited

7.75 –– Tide Miracle Stain

7:43 –– Dodge RAM Farmers/Paul Harvey

7:27 –– Doritos Fashionista Dad

7:20 –– Jeep Families Waiting

In the “Bottom Five” were the two Black Crown party commercials, and at the bottom of the list was the ad that “might have earned the most buzz for the night” –– Go Daddy’s commercial featuring Bar Refaeli kissing (making out with) a tech worker.

It appears that the “party” and “making out” scene is not something that most Americans want to see when their family gathers around the TV set to watch the Super Bowl. One has to wonder if the creative “geniuses” at the corporations understand Americans or the Super Bowl at all.

How many times have we heard about our tax dollars paying for government workers who spend their days watching porn at work?

Which city in the United States is home to the most pornography viewers? The answer is Washington, D.C., the seat of the nation’s power players. Do you ever wonder why the Department of Justice does not enforce obscenity laws? Could the viewing habits of D.C.’s denizens influence the lack of enforcement?

The source of this information is PornHub, a XXX website. The New York Daily News carried the story about the study and noted that the rate of online pornography watched in D.C. is 14.18 videos per person in a year. While that may not sound like a lot to some, consider that the D.C. rate is nearly twice the rate of the second highest porn viewing state, Hawaii, where it is 7.57 per person.

We know that not everyone watches pornography, so that means the people actually watching online pornography in Washington are watching a lot more videos than 14.18 each. Who is watching them, and are they doing so at work? Does it influence their work?

How many times have we heard about our tax dollars paying for government workers who spend their days watching porn at work? One Washington Times article lists these agencies that have employees with porn problems: Pentagon, Secret Service, Transportation Security Administration, U.S. State Department, Department of Homeland Security, Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Missile Defense Agency. The article quotes a cyber-security expert who warns, “Many pornographic websites are infected and criminals and foreign intelligence services such as Russia’s use them to gain access and harvest data.”

You would think that national security nugget would be a good enough reason for prosecuting obscenity producers and purveyors, but evidently it is not.

In 2011, Attorney General Eric Holder shut down the Obscenity Prosecution Task Force, which was established under Pres. George W. Bush’s Administration. A Politico article quoted Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) in reaction to this move:

“Attorney General Holder told the Judiciary Committee last year that this task force was the centerpiece of the strategy to combat adult obscenity,” Sen. Hatch told POLITICO in a statement Friday. “Rather than initiate a single new case since President Obama took office, however, the only development in this area has been the dismantling of the task force. As the toxic waste of obscenity continues to spread and harm everyone it touches, it appears the Obama Administration is giving up without a fight.”

According to the PornHub statistics, obscenity blankets Washington. The lack of adult obscenity prosecutions is harming everyone. While the Department of Justice focuses on prosecuting cases of child pornography, those who are watching adult pornography may turn to child pornography when the adult material no longer excites them. If adult pornography prosecutions are non-existent, a gateway to child pornography is left in place to ensnare new viewers.

So, while some of D.C.’s denizens turn a blind eye to punishing the producers and distributors of obscenity, others are glued to their porn-filled computer screens. The key to why obscenity, while illegal, thrives in D.C., and beyond may be one mouse click away on screens hidden behind closed doors and cubicle walls in offices throughout Washington.