Oppose Barack Obama's nomination of Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense!

Former Senator Chuck Hagel's prior statements and positions on Israel, Iran, and U.S. military operations and funding make him the wrong choice to be the United States of America's Secretary of Defense.

As Senator Ted Cruz recently wrote… "[Hagel's] views on foreign and defense policy are out of the mainstream, and he is not a good fit for Secretary of Defense… His record on Israel strongly suggests that he views Israel not as our friend but as a nuisance."

Bipartisan opposition is growing against his nomination.

Mainstream Americans want a Secretary of Defense who will readily recognize and defend our allies, like Israel, while protecting us from our enemies and those who intend to do us harm, like Iran.

There are far better choices for Defense Secretary than Chuck Hagel!

DOJ Agrees that High Court Should Reconsider Liberty’s ObamaCare Ruling

Tomorrow is the most important election of our lifetime with state and federal races.

"Those opposing us will get what they deserve" - Obama Advisor (source Mat Staver)

We now know precisely what is in store for biblical and values voters if Barack Obama wins another four years in the White House. Just hours from determining the direction of our nation, I still haven’t heard from all of our partners and I am concerned that you may have missed Valerie Jarrett’s chilling warning.

Jarrett is considered to be the Obama administration’s most powerful advisor and I don’t doubt she’ll do everything possible to enact her threat if given the chance. Please see my message below and prayerfully consider how, in this late hour, you can help Liberty Action PAC defeat this statist regime. Please read my urgent message from the weekend below – Mat.

We must not let Obama win another four years. The consequence would be disastrous. Thank you in advance for your outstanding support!

Mat Staver
Liberty Action PAC
http://libertycounsel.org

he U.S. Department of Justice has informed the Supreme Court that it does not oppose Liberty University’s Petition for Rehearing the Court’s denial of review of the case of Liberty University v. Geithner. Liberty Counsel, representing Liberty University and two private individuals, asked the Court to grant its Petition for review, vacate the ruling of the Court of Appeals, and remand (send back) the case for the Court of Appeals to consider the outstanding and unresolved claims, including the constitutionality of the employer mandate and the Free Exercise claim.

The Court of Appeals in the Liberty University case ruled 2-1 that the Anti-Injunction Act (AIA) barred it from reaching the merits of the case, ruling that if the individual insurance mandate in ObamaCare is a tax, then the tax had to be paid before a court could entertain the suit. Liberty Counsel filed a petition with the Supreme Court, asking it to reverse the Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court heard three days of oral argument on challenges to Obamacare, and the first day was dedicated to the issue raised in the Liberty University case. In June 2012, the Supreme Court ruled that the AIA does not apply to the individual insurance mandate, but did not reach the merits of Liberty University’s case. The Supreme Court then denied Liberty University’s request for review. Liberty Counsel then asked the Court to grant its petition, vacate the ruling of the Court of Appeals, and send it back to address the unresolved merits of the case, namely, the employer mandate and the Free Exercise claim based on ObamaCare’s forced funding of abortion. The DOJ filed its response late yesterday and agreed with Liberty Counsel’s request.

If the Court grants the request, now unopposed, then Liberty University v. Geithner will be the first case in the nation in which a federal court of appeals would consider challenges to the employer mandate and the Free Exercise of Religion claim. The case could then go back to the Supreme Court in 2013.

“I am very pleased that the Department of Justice agrees that the case should go back to the Court of Appeals to address the unresolved issues in ObamaCare. ObamaCare is the biggest funding of abortion in American history,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law. “ObamaCare will for the first time require employers and individuals to directly fund abortion. This abortion mandate collides with religious freedom and the rights of conscience,” Staver said.

Liberty Counsel is an international nonprofit, litigation, education, and policy organization dedicated to advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of life, and the family since 1989, by providing pro bono assistance and representation on these and related topics.

God will see that the right person wins and it will not be Palumbo

Folks, you know that you will not be elected to another term when the gay community turns against you as they have Lexington's Representative Ruth Ann Palumbo for being a slum lord.

When you sponsor legislation for the so-called "gay rights" movement and they in-turn strive to disgrace your reputation it shows that gays have no morals, the very reason sodomites alone hold the shame that forced God to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah.

Joe Sonka, owner of Barefoot and Progressive

It’s no surprise when Republicans resort to blaming the President and Government regulations in order to divert attention from actual problems.

The Bush years crashed the economy? Blame Obama’s regulations.

The water is too clean? Blame Obama’s regulations.

Got a really annoying hang nail? Blame Obama’s regulations.

What happens less — because generally they’re smarter people… generally — is Democrats using Obama and his “regulations” to shirk their own responsibility.

But that, sadly, is exactly what Ruth Ann Palumbo, a state House representative from Lexington (since 1991) has done. She’s got a house, it’s rundown, the city’s code enforcement is telling her to fix it… and she ain’t doing nuthin.

This is pathetic:

Neighbors say the home at 10 Deepwood Drive, with its trash-strewn yard, is a worsening eyesore and a public health risk because raccoons and rats come and go through various holes in its exterior.

“I’ve been here eight years, and that house has never been lived in. It’s been abandoned and it’s bringing down property values all along the street,” said Barry Crume, who also lives on Deepwood Drive, a cul-de-sac of large, handsome brick and stone homes.

“I don’t know if she’s embarrassed that she can’t deal with this or if she thinks she’s above the law because she’s an elected official,” Crume said. “Whatever it is, she needs to fix it.”

Now, look. If it’s an issue of money, my heart goes out to Ruth Ann. If it’s just a matter of time, I understand… for instance, I’ve got a pile of dishes I need to do and they, apparently, aren’t doing themselves.

But what won’t be excused is this:

Speaking this week, Palumbo said she never intended for her home to fall into such disrepair. She said she delayed rehabilitation because of hazards inside the house — mold, asbestos and lead-based paint — that will require specialists to remove. Federal environmental rules for such work have been strengthened under President Barack Obama, she said.

“There are a lot of new regulations that we want to comply with,” said Palumbo, chairman of the House Economic Development Committee. “It wasn’t like you could just open the Yellow Pages and call someone to do all this kind of work.”

This is stupid. This is pandering. This is making an excuse of the lowest variety in order to avoid scrutiny and responsibility.

Let’s be clear: Ruth Ann Palumbo is blaming Barack Obama and government regulations for not fixing her house 8 years ago.

8 years ago, Ruth Ann’s house had asbestos, mold and lead-based paint, and 8 long year ago, Barack Obama and his regulation brownshirts stopped Ruth Ann from fixing up her house.

C’mon.

I’m sure there’s a real explanation, and whatever it is, by the looks of it, it’s a rough one. But don’t blame Barack Obama just because it’s easy. That’s ridiculous.

Jacob Payne - Page One Kentucky

No one in Lexington has the guts to bring this up because they fear retribution.

So I will.

Why on earth are you allowed to maintain your legislative seat when you don’t live in the district you represent?

The house you claim as your residence has been empty for years. There’s a giant dumpster that’s been in your front yard for at least a year (along with a portable pooper) but no building permit exists. No workmen ever show up. The Health Department has received complaints. Kevin Stinnett’s office has received complaints.

You used to stay on Old Paris Pike but that’s apparently not the case these days.

So why are you claiming to live where you clearly do not?

What’s the deal? What is your excuse?

I asked you a couple years ago and you still haven’t provided an answer.

Payne may still be recovering from the sealed lawsuit against him.

Does anyone wonder why Palumbo's son committed suicide?

The comments jump at you with sin

Dear Ruth Ann – I live on Deepwood Drive down the street from your house. I recently sent you a letter about your plan to either maintain or improve your property. You didn’t respond. I left you 3 messages at work and you didn’t respond. I have called your home phone number given out by your office and the voicemail is full. I stopped by Palumbo Lumber to talk with your sons about fixing your house and they didn’t have any answers. I am very frustrated because the condition of your home on Deepwood Drive is bringing down the property values. The appearance of your home is ruining the charm of our neighborhood. There are stray cats, racoons and opossum living in your attic. They crawl in your home through the big hole in your roof. Are you going to fix these problems? Please inform the 18 residents that live on Deepwood Drive what your plan is with your home. I have asked several times and cannot get you to answer any of my questions! if you cannot represent yourself in your own neighborhood, then how can you represent your constituents in your district?

and

Does anyone else think it’s ironic that Jaime Palumbo grew up on a street called Deepwood?

Palumbo's opponent, Richard Marrs will cleanup Lexington: Richard Marrs is married to his wife Melanie and they have four children ages 6-12. He enjoys spending time with his family and coaching his sons in various sports leagues.

None of his children have met the fire of hell by committing suicide, a sin my fellow Christians that cannot be forgiven.

This proves my earlier lost that the sodomites are loyal to no one.

1. Kentucky's alleged equality organizations failing
2. God punished New York because of gay marriage law
3. Gay Marriage Threatens Our Freedom
4. Unions That Divide: Churches Split Over Gay Marriage

Begging people to vote for State Representatives Palumbo, Westrom, and Burch? That would be Kentucky Equality Federation's Jordan Palmer. Palmer says it is his particular "Kentucky Spirit" blog. Someone put this man out of his misery. He may have rebounded from his surgery but God continues to punish sodomites. Shame on him for getting the feds to force two people to plead guilty to a hate crime. You cannot read someone's mind and it was just a bad drug deal. Gays are drunks and drug addicts who spread disease.

God punished New York because of gay marriage law

The destructive impact of hurricane/tropical storm Sandy on New York could be God's vengeance for homosexual marriages being legal in that state. New York has never seen a storm like this before. Why? It is the vengeance of God. Though God does not openly show his awesome power as he did when destroying Sodom and Gomorrah for homosexuality, God controls nature.

Sodomites and non God fearing people at Kentucky Equality Federation, Lexington Fairness, Marriage Equality Kentucky, and Louisville Fairness Campaign should witness the warning of God.

Marriage Equality Kentucky people say they are disenfranchised because they cannot marry a person of the same sex, goat, pig, or what have you. If you support one of these organizations especially Marriage Equality Kentucky, repent now and become righteous before the clock chimes midnight.

We cannot even count on the Lexington Herald Leader or the Louisville Courier Journal to be objective, as Ann Coulter said they are corrupt progressives with each endorsing Obama and the gay agenda.

As Brother John McTernan posted, When God Judges a Nation For Homosexuality. Some of the article is below, or read it all.

I want to clear something up. I am not saying this super destructive hurricane was because of the homosexual act. The Holy God of Israel will judge individuals for their sinful acts.

What I am saying is the judgment is for the government promoting homosexual “marriage” as an ordinance. Once a nation legalizes sin, like abortion and homosexual “marriage”: that nation falls under the direct judgment of the Holy God of Israel. God does not destroy a nation right away but first warns.

Also, the judgment comes from more than homosexuality. Abortion and pressuring Israel to divide God’s covenant land also brings severe judgment.

It now appears that the warnings for God are coming to an end, and the destructive judgments have arrived.

America has not repented of promoting the homosexual agenda so the judgments will not stop. You can be angry with me, but it does not change that America has fallen under the judgment hand of the Holy God of Israel. God will not tolerate homosexual “marriage”. It is the end of the line with sin.

Isaiah 26:9 With my soul have I desired thee in the night; yea, with my spirit within me will I seek thee early: for when thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness.

The following is a teaching from the Bible which shows what triggers God’s judgment on a nation. America is now nearly fully engaged in making these sins ordinances.

Gay Marriage Threatens Our Freedom

Gay Marriage Threatens Our Freedom

By James Milliken, Jr.

Referenda on changing the legal definition of marriage to include same-sex relationships have become a recurrent feature of our electoral landscape in recent years.

Voters have rejected the proposed changes every time. Redefining marriage is indeed a big deal, which is not only a threat to liberty, but a significant step in the direction of totalitarian tyranny.

Despite thirty-plus campaigns, there has been little informed public discussion about what marriage is and the state's interest in maintaining traditional marriage (sadly, the proponents of redefining marriage prefer to rely on name-calling and intimidation, which leaves little room for dispassionate debate). As a consequence, many voters have never heard the actual arguments in defense of traditional marriage, but only the strawmen that its opponents are fond of pummeling, most of which (on the surface) appeal to the idea of freedom.

For example, I once heard a nationally-syndicated radio talk-show host, a self-identified libertarian who generally takes a conservative position, say: "not one person has been able to call in and tell me how two men or two women marrying each other will harm their own marriage" (in other words, mind your own business). Or how often have you heard something like "traditional marriage supporters are anti-freedom; they want to keep gay people from marrying the partner of their choice." I see a third of these strawmen every Sunday outside my church, where a protester holds a sign that says: "When did I get to vote on your marriage?"

Despite their surface plausibility, none of these arguments withstand more than cursory scrutiny. Consider the case of the radio personality: of course nobody had ever successfully argued on his show that two men or two women marrying each other would harm their own marriage, because nobody anywhere defends traditional marriage on that ground; the arguments against redefining marriage are much more fundamental. The real question is whether then union of a man and women is different from that of two men or two women (hint: the answer has something to do with babies), and whether the state has an interest in fostering and protecting exclusive heterosexual relationships that it does not have in same-sex relationships. The radio host didn't mention whether he had ever had that discussion on his show (curious, because that is what I hear defenders of traditional marriage talking about).

This threat is not merely theoretical. The very real consequences of the encroaching tyranny of the gay marriage crowd are already becoming apparent. A couple years ago, for instance, a redefinition of marriage passed by the Maine legislature was narrowly overturned in a "Peoples Veto" referendum. A critical factor in the repeal was the attempt by gay-marriage advocates to deprive a public-school social worker named Don Mandell of his license (and hence his livelihood) because he had appeared in a pro-traditional marriage ad (this in response a coworker who had appeared in a pro-gay marriage ad and had faced no censure).

There are numerous reports from around the country of teachers whose standing is threatened, or of students who are disciplined, for doing no more than expressing a pro-traditional marriage opinion. Outside of the school system we see professional photographers, Knights of Columbus halls, and even dating services facing lawsuits simply because they decline to include same-sex weddings among their services. In the case of Chik-Fil-A we have seen public officials threaten to ban a business simply because its owner has expressed his personal support of traditional marriage, which is still the law of the land in most of our country. It is not at all far-fetched to project that today's harassment will become full-scale prosecution if the full gay marriage legal agenda is enacted (as is already the case in Canada and parts of Europe).

If that weren't bad enough, it gets worse. The redefinition of marriage by the state would not only mean a violation of the freedom of those who disagree: it would be a giant step closer to a government that is genuinely totalitarian.

More than that, and perhaps of more interest to libertarians and other lovers of freedom, families are, along with organized religion, the most important "mediating institutions" between the individual and the state. Mediating institutions are groups of people large and small that help serve as a check on the government, and provide individuals with a way of influencing the state much more effectively than they can do on their own. These independent sources of authority are essential to the preservation of liberty: without them the behemoth of the state would easily crush the lone citizen. That's why totalitarians of every stripe make the subjugation or even destruction of these institutions (especially the family and organized religion) a top priority. Giving the state the power to manipulate, redefine and hence to unmake such essential protectors of freedom must necessarily lead to an ever more powerful state, and an ever smaller place for individual liberty.

The desire of libertarians to work to preserve personal freedom is quite understandable, but the legal redefinition of marriage would do just the opposite: it necessarily means the loss of freedom to express and to act according to beliefs at odds with the gay agenda; more ominously, it will grant to the state an enormous and unprecedented power for remaking society according to its own designs.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/10/gay_marriage_threatens_our_freedom.html#ixzz2Ad69UeTw

John Edwards, Roger Clemens, and Federal Witch Hunts

Here's another example of why I don't trust my government, and why I want it to do less.

The prosecutions of John Edwards and Roger Clemens were a disgrace.

They wasted our tax dollars.

They cost years of life and hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees for these men.

The "not guilty" verdicts of both men was the only redeeming aspect their trials.

They should never have been prosecuted in the first place. The "laws" under which they were prosecuted had no moral or constitutional legitimacy.

Consider the Edwards case: Campaign finance regulations are an assault on freedom of conscience and the First Amendment. If I support a candidate, I have the human right to support him any way I want, directly or indirectly. My free press rights allow me to express myself, even if (especially if) it's about elections!

(In fact, campaign laws make it HARDER for the "little guy" to organize, whereas the wealthy can afford to pay lawyers and accountants to jump through regulatory hoops.)

The Clemens case was equally disgraceful. Is it okay to lie to someone who asks you about something that's none of their business? I think it is.

Drug prohibition, including steroid prohibition, is not authorized by any provision in the Constitution, and it violates the Ninth and Tenth Amendments. Congressional hearings on steroids in baseball was a grandstanding, affront to the rule of law and called into question who should've gone on trial. (Hint: They probably have Chairman in front of their name.)

Moreover, Edwards and Clemens _had no victims_. They neither initiated violence nor engaged in theft. Therefore, their alleged actions weren't crimes.

I hope that Congress and the Justice Department's witch hunters - oops, District Attorneys - learn valuable lessons from these disgraces.

For the Edwards and Clemens juries sent a powerful message: agree or disagree with their ethics and actions, but these men do not belong in prison.

Regrettably, it may have been only due to their fame and pricey legal teams that Edwards and Clemens got off. Poor defendants often don't have a chance against overzealous prosecutors.

That's why you must repeal all federal victimless crime laws and end silly crusades such as "campaign finance reform" and the War on Drugs. I agree with DownSizeDC.org on this issue and the post.

Unions That Divide: Churches Split Over Gay Marriage

At a black Pentecostal church in Raleigh, N.C., the Rev. Patrick Wooden entered the sanctuary on Sunday to a standing ovation, exulting that God’s “high hand” had led voters last week to pass a statewide amendment banning same-sex marriage. He took to the pulpit and denounced President Obama for taking a stand “in support of sin,” and “in opposition to the biblical model of marriage.”

Same-sex marriage became a reality in the United States in 2004 in the wake of a ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Court that it was required under the equal protection clause of the commonwealth' Constitution. Prior to 2012, same-sex marriage was also legalized in New York, Connecticut, Iowa, New Hampshire, Vermont and Washington, D.C. Early in 2012, Washington State and Maryland both approved same-sex marriage laws, but neither took effect immediately and both were expected to be challenged in referendums.

In early May, North Carolina voted in large numbers for a constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriages, partnerships and civil unions, becoming the 30th state in the country and the last in the South to include a prohibition on gay marriage in the state constitution. A thousand miles away, at a predominantly white, Lutheran church in Madison, Wis., where a rainbow banner greets churchgoers arriving for services, the Rev. Susan Schneider preached that gay men and lesbians were included when Jesus commanded his followers to love one another: “Knocking down the walls is what Jesus was after.”

Mr. Obama’s declaration last week that he supports same-sex marriage prompted ministers around the country to take to their pulpits on Sunday and preach on the issue. But in the clash over homosexuality, the battle lines do not simply pit ministers against secular advocates for gay rights. Religion is on both sides in this conflict. The battle is actually church versus church, minister versus minister, and Scripture versus Scripture.

The dividing lines are often unpredictable. There are black churches that welcome openly gay couples, and white churches that do not. Some Presbyterian churches hire openly gay clergy members, while others will not. The Roman Catholic Church teaches that homosexual behavior is a sin, but there are Catholic priests who secretly bless gay unions.

And leaders in the United Methodist Church have been debating whether to ordain openly gay ministers for four decades, and voted again just this month to uphold their prohibition. But there are Methodist ministers who perform same-sex marriages in defiance of church rules who share the denomination with ministers who preach that America is going the way of Sodom and Gomorrah because of homosexuality.

More at the New York Times

If marriage loses, we all lose

The indispensible social pillar of marriage is being undermined and marginalized in our national discourse. I am concerned that some conservative leaders are backing down in their defense of marriage while making overt concessions to the pro-homosexual community.

Tragically, we are seeing a trend within conservative ranks de-emphasizing the importance of defending marriage from the attacks of pro-homosexual activists. And pro-marriage initiatives appear to be declining at the very time they are most desperately needed!

Some conservative leaders are either avoiding the issue or are actively diminishing the role of the marriage issue in 2012’s campaigns. There are even suggestions that natural marriage may not get much support at all in 2012’s conservative party platforms.

This retreat is totally unacceptable! If marriage loses, we all lose!

The Honorable Ken Blackwell, a Visiting Professor of Law at Liberty University School of Law and highly respected political commentator, recently said it this way:

“Marriage is the union of one man and one woman. The fundamental institution of human civilization should be preserved as it has been known through the entirety of American history and Western civilization.”

Respected conservative columnist Don Feder also weighed into this controversy:

“Surrender on gay marriage is surrender on marriage – which is surrender on the family and, ultimately, surrender on civilization. Unfortunately, many conservative intellectuals have lost sight of a crucial fact: American exceptionalism rests on three pillars – faith, family, and freedom. Remove any one, and the entire structure collapses.”

If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do? The fact is, you and I and other enlightened pro-family citizens are going to have to be the ones who come forward to defend natural marriage in America!

I urge you to take a moment to sign our Statement of Support upholding the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

We are calling on all of our friends and supporters to insist that President Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder and the Department of Justice (DOJ), congressional leaders, and military leaders actively comply with and defend the Defense of Marriage Act! This duly-passed act of the United States Congress is the law of the land and will remain so until that status is changed due to a holding by the U.S. Supreme Court!

Click here to sign Statement of Support upholding the federal Defense of Marriage Act: http://www.lcaction.cc/656/petition.asp

As you know, we are also incensed that activist judges have ruled in favor of same-sex “marriage” at the expense of society’s greater good in several states where the clear majority of voters support marriage as being a union between one man and one woman.

This proposed law must also be defeated.

Liberty Counsel Action is on the front lines of marriage’s defense.

This battle for traditional marriage and family has enormous national significance and a split in conservative opinion on marriage only encourages the homosexual community’s quest for full national recognition of same-sex “marriage.”

Kentucky's alleged equality organizations failing

Since I was been absent things have gotten better, witness the awesome power of the Family Foundation of Kentucky:

The future of instant racing gambling in Kentucky is back in the hands of a trial judge who the Kentucky Court of Appeals on Friday ordered to further develop the issues surrounding the slot-like game.

The 2-1 decision doesn't expressly prohibit instant racing at Kentucky Downs in Franklin near the Kentucky-Tennessee state line and Ellis Park in Henderson. Instead, the court sent the case back to Franklin Circuit Judge Thomas Wingate with instructions to allow the Family Foundation of Kentucky and the state to explore several issues surrounding the game, in which patrons bet on historic races without knowing the names of the trainers, jockeys or horses involved.

In December 2010, Wingate upheld a proposal allowing tracks to accept pari-mutuel bets on rebroadcasts of the old races. The Family Foundation intervened in a lawsuit seeking to clarify the issue.

By not allowing the state and the Family Foundation of Kentucky to exchange evidence and flesh out the issues, it is impossible to tell what the trial judge relied on to justify upholding instant racing, Senior Judge Joseph E. Lambert wrote for the appeals court.

Martin Cothran, a senior policy analyst for the Lexington-based Family Foundation of Kentucky, said the ruling levels the playing field in the litigation.

"With an issue as ripe for corruption as expanded gambling, the public has a right to question, know and understand the underlying facts relating to the gambling activity and the special interests involved," Cothran said.

Social clubs like the faux and defunct Kentucky Fairness Alliance pose no threat to family values in Kentucky. Other social groups, Lexington Fairness and the Gay and Lesbian Services Organization or GLSO are also without power or merit, just a bunch of homosexuals getting together to get drunk? Cocktail anyone?

Louisville Fairness Campaign has proven how useless they are with the Berea ordinance. Chris Hartman the director of Louisville Fairness Campaign publicly promised a Madison County Human Rights Commission.  They created it and omitted the gay agenda, a major slap in the face to Hartman's credibility.

Hartman also proved that he himself is a bully, covered by major news outlets:

The leading supporter of the so-called “Bullying Bill” became verbally and physically abusive in a Capitol Annex hallway with an opponent of the bill after the bill went down to defeat in a House committee, attracting the attention of State Police and other observers. The Family Foundation called on the Fairness Campaign to issue a public apology for the behavior of its director, Chris Hartman. “If you are really opposed to bullying, the last thing you probably want to do is engage in it in plain sight after a meeting in which a bill prohibiting it was just discussed,” said Family Foundation spokesman Martin Cothran. Hartman obstructed the path of Andrew Walker, who had lobbied the committee against the bill, harassing him as he was leaving the restroom after the meeting and began interrogating him in an intimidating way. Several minutes later, Hartman cornered Walker again and began verbally bullying him with charges of being opposed to student safety.

According to Louisville’s Courier Journal, Hartman “became verbally and physically abusive toward Andrew Walker, a policy analyst for The Family Foundation of Kentucky, who had lobbied against the bill.” As a result, The Family Foundation of Kentucky has called on the Fairness Campaign to issue a public apology for the behavior of Hartman.

Personally I think criminal charges should have been filed but the Louisville Fairness Campaign still has some political strength.

Kentucky Equality Federation's former president, Jordan Palmer successfully lobbied the feds to prosecute the first so-called gay hate crime in the United States. So what? They also forced the city of Hazard to make changes and got a true Christian suspended from his job just because he didn't want homosexuals kissing in his pool.

With Palmer no longer in the drivers seat, the future political power of Kentucky Equality Federation is in question. With Palmer and his political connections gone Kentucky Equality Federation will collapse on itself.  Palmer stepped down for health reasons, he probably has AIDS knowing how easy the gays have sex.

Joshua Koch the Kentucky Equality Federation's new president condoned the illegal removal of a freedom of speech billboard which told God fearing people the truth: "Abortion is Murder and Homosexuality is a Sin!" Just how hard do you think the Lexington Police Department is going to investigate the removal of that billboard with a gay mayor?

Be warned, David Adams may be busy but I am back!

T-shirt company victim of modern witch hunt

Kentucky.com
Ky. Voices: T-shirt company victim of modern witch hunt
By Martin Cothran

The Family Foundation of Kentucky covered this story and commented in the Lexington Herald:

Martin Cothran is spokesman for the Family Foundation, a conservative advocacy group.

Herald-Leader columnist Tom Eblen cheered on the witch hunt over a Christian businessman's refusal to print T-shirts with a message that contradicts his religious views.

The man is being hauled before the Lexington Human Rights commission, which is being called upon to throw him into the political water to see if he floats.

Taking up his torch, Eblen added his voice to those of the Gay and Lesbian Services Organization and Lexington Mayor Jim Gray, who are chanting the political equivalent of "Burn him!"

The University of Kentucky, too, has added its increasingly anti-religious voice to the din. This is the same university that refused to hire a science professor on the grounds that he was an evangelical, resulting in a complaint to the Kentucky Commission on Human Rights, which was completely ignored.

Eblen and the rest of the mob are arguing that the business, Hands on Originals, has violated the Lexington Fairness Ordinance, an ordinance which added coverage for sexual orientation to that for race, religion, gender and national origin in anti-discrimination laws governing housing, employment and public accommodations.

The ordinance prohibits a business from refusing to serve a person on the basis of his sexual orientation.

In a famous scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail, a woman is accused of being a witch. The reason? "She looks like one." To Eblen and the rest of the witch hunters, Hands On Originals looks like it's discriminating, even though it's not.

What Eblen and the mob haven't noticed in the midst of their frenzied denunciations is that Hands On Originals did not discriminate against any customer on the basis of sexual orientation. In fact, the business has an expressed policy against it. What it did do was refuse to print a T-shirt with a message that went against its religious convictions.

It didn't refuse to print the T-shirts because of who was asking it to print them; it refused to print them because of what the T-shirts said. This is not prohibited by the ordinance.

Had the group come to Hands On to print a shirt that said "I love the Wildcats," there would have been no problem.

Ironically, the people really discriminating are UK and any other organization that pulls its business from the T-shirt company, since they are doing so on the basis of the owner's religious beliefs. If they were providing the service rather than receiving it, they would be the ones violating anti-discrimination laws.

It used to be witches who were supposed to contort themselves into strange positions, but now gay activist groups, marching under the banner of tolerance, are twisting themselves into the tolerance police, intent, not on preventing discrimination against individuals, but on using the power of government to force others to agree with them.

But in their increasingly intolerant crusade, they have apparently failed to take note of the consequences.

Imagine that you ran a T-shirt business and a white supremacist group came to you to print T-shirts that said, "Down with N-----s!" According to the reasoning of Eblen and the mob, anti-discrimination laws would require you to print them. Not to do so would be to discriminate against a racial group, in this case, Aryans.

Here's where the gay rights activists and liberal journalists meet the Aryan Nation.

Eblen's bizarre reasoning doesn't end there. He ventures into the issue of what Christianity actually says about homosexuality, saying that, the way he reads it, the Gospels aren't against it. Notice the subtle avoidance of the rest of the New Testament, in which Paul leaves little doubt about the issue. Or the Old Testament, which doesn't exactly read like a gay rights tract.

Then, as if to amuse those of his readers who have actually read the thing, he charges those who disagree with him with selectively reading the Bible.

Might as well burn the Bible along with the witch.

I have a new slogan for a T-shirt: "Down with the Tolerance Police!" I'll take it to a gay-owned T-shirt company and point out that, according to the groups who say they represent them, they have no choice but to print it.