The U.S. Senate voted Thursday to approve a defense authorization bill which included a provision that not only repealed the military ban on sodomy, but also repealed the ban on having sex with animals — or bestiality.
You know (well, maybe you don't), I'm a pacifist and, therefore, an anti-militarist; but this is beyond that.
Homosexual fascists are turning the US military into an arm for the Global Homosexual-Fascist Movement/Agenda. There's no doubt about it at all!
Any one who fights for the so-called "right" of anyone else to have sex with animals and/or to put his penis up an anus is doubly insane. It's even triply insane to do it for the money.
Triple insanity: Greed, violence, and sexual depravity are three facets of the same evil that is selfish lust. Each leads to the other. Each facilitates the other.
Sin is its own slippery slope.
Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.
WorldNetDaily's (WND ) White House correspondent,Â Les Kinsolving (Congress backtracks on plan to legalize bestiality: Conference committee restores prohhibition for members of military), asked White House Press Secretary Jay Carney the following:
The Family Research Council and CNS News both reported a 93-to-7 U.S. Senate vote to approve a defense authorization bill that, quote, 'includes a provision which not only repeals the military law on sodomy, but also repeals the military ban on sex with animals, or bestiality.' Does the commander in chief approve or disapprove of bestiality in our armed forces?
Carney replied, "I don't have any comment on – I don't have any comment on that. Let me go to another question. Let's get to something more serious."
"More serious"? It's not a serious question to that young, ignorant, selfish man because he doesn't want to lose politically. It is a very serious question because Barack Obama lauded Harry Hay.
...we have Kevin Jennings, Obama's former "safe school czar," who wrote the foreword to a book called "Queering Elementary Education." Jennings has made clear that Harry Hay is one of his heroes. Harry Hay is an icon for the organization NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association, a known pedophile group) whose motto was "sex before eight before it's too late" when marching in gay pride parades.
That's far from all, but the illiberal left doesn't want anyone to realize just how serious all of this is before it's too late.
...Frank Kameny, another radical homosexual activist that surrounded the Obama administration and who died this year on National Coming Out Day, said, "Bestiality is not my thing ... But it seems to be a harmless foible or idiosyncrasy of some people. So, as long as the animal doesn't mind (and the animal rarely does), I don't mind, and I don't see why anyone else should."
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)