Christian evangelical minister and anti-gay activist Franklin Graham is attacking Pete Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Indiana and one of the top Democratic presidential candidates. Graham appears to take issue with Buttigieg calling himself a Christian, and goes so far as to suggest the 37-year old Rhodes Scholar and Navy veteran is going to go to hell.
Graham, who has spent years attacking LGBT people for being LGBT, does not spare Buttigieg. He warns the Indiana politician will suffer “eternal damnation” if he does not “repent” his homosexuality, as The Daily Beast noted.
Linking to a CNN article quoting Buttigieg saying, “God doesn’t have a political party,” Graham on Facebook responded, saying, “Buttigieg is right—God doesn’t have a political party.”
“But God does have commandments, laws, and standards He gives us to live by. God is God. He doesn’t change. His Word is the same yesterday, today, and forever,” Graham notes.
“Mayor Buttigieg says he is a gay Christian and he wants to unite people behind him. I’m sure there will be many people who will want to follow. But as a Christian I believe what the Bible says. God’s Word defines homosexuality as sin, something to be repentant of, not something to be flaunted, praised, or politicized,” the 66-year old son of the far more unifying Rev. Billy Graham claimed.
“The Bible defines marriage as between a man and a woman—not two men, not two women. Mayor Buttigieg also said that to him, ‘the core of faith is regard for one another.’ We are definitely to support and help each other—no question,” Graham wrote.
“But that does not come above believing and being obedient to what God says is truth. Without that foundation, we really can’t help anyone in a way that impacts their eternity,” he added, mistakenly believing that he has the right to impose his view of “eternity” onto others.
“The core of the Christian faith is believing and following Jesus Christ, who God sent to be the Savior of the world—to save us from sin, to save us from hell, to save us from eternal damnation,” Graham claimed, clearly leaving out a few chapters of the Christian bible.
Graham is rather selective in his excusing of sin.
Last year he claimed now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s alleged attempted rape was just something “he did as a teenager” – apparently no repentance required.
Graham also called an alleged child abuser (the details are horrific and sickening) a “great patriot.” Apparently no repentance required there, either.
In fact, according to Graham, Americans should keep their noses out of the sins of everyone else, including, President Donald Trump’s.
Graham before the 2016 election announced that “everyone should realize that every word that is spoken or thought is recorded by God,” and therefore voters had no need to judge Trump.
He also defended Trump’s affair with porn actress Stormy Daniels, as “nobody’s business” — although he insisted in 1998 that Bill Clinton’s “sins are not private.”
Extreme child abuse, infidelity and sex with porn stars and paying them hush money, and attempted rape – all pretty big sins in the eye of God, one might think. Not to Graham.
Apparently, Franklin Graham thinks the only ones who need to repent are Bill Clinton and gay people like Pete Buttigieg.
Image via Facebook
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
Amy Coney Barrett Puts Reversal of Marriage Equality ‘Clearly Within Sight’ Says National Organization for Marriage
While many Republicans and right-wing activists are pretending that they have no idea how Amy Coney Barrett will rule on major issues, anti-equality activists like National Organization for Marriage President Brian Brown aren’t being so coy.
In an email to supporters Wednesday, Brown said his group’s goal of overturning the U.S. Supreme Court’s marriage equality ruling in Obergefell is now “clearly within sight.”
When the US Supreme Court illegitimately redefined marriage in 2015 with their anti-constitutional ruling in the Obergefell case, NOM vowed to work every day to overturn that decision. People said we were crazy to think that was possible. We were mocked and ridiculed by LGBT activists for even suggesting that the Supreme Court would ever reverse their ruling imposing gay ‘marriage.’ Regardless, NOM pressed on and now the supposedly unthinkable is clearly within sight.
They don’t think we’re crazy any longer.
Brown was gleeful that Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., mentioned NOM during his questioning of Barrett, calling it evidence that “leading politicians from both parties see NOM as a powerful force for marriage and all the issues we care so deeply about.”
Brown continued, “We may already have the five votes we need on the US Supreme Court to overturn the Obergefell decision that redefined marriage, but there is no question that the addition of Amy Coney Barrett to the Court significantly strengthens our hand.”
This article was originally published on Right Wing Watch and is reprinted here by permission.
Image of Brian Brown via Facebook
‘I Won’t Do That’: Amy Coney Barrett Refuses to Reveal Her Legal Position on Same-Sex Marriage Law Obergefell
Judge Amy Coney Barrett is refusing to say if Obergefell, the law that found same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry was properly decided. Amid questioning from Connecticut Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal, Barrett held fast, claiming she has an obligation to not share her legal beliefs.
“I’m asking your legal position judge,” Senator Blumenthal told Judge Barrett. “Not your moral position, not a policy position, not a religious faith position, a legal position. Correctly decided? Obergefell v. Hodges.”
“Senator Blumenthal, every time you asked me a question about whether a case was correctly decided or not, I cannot answer that question because I cannot suggest agreement or disagreement with precedents of the Supreme Court,” Barrett insisted. “All of those precedents bind me now as a Seventh Circuit Judge, and were I to be confirmed, I would be responsible for applying the law of stare decisis to all of them.”
Two conservative Supreme Court justices, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, on the first day of this year’s Supreme Court term, had no problem revealing their legal opinions on Obergefell, announcing they believe it was wrongly decided. They called legalizing marriage for same-sex couples “a problem” that only the Court can “fix.”
“But your honor,” Blumenthal continued, “think of how you would feel as a gay or lesbian American to hear that you can’t answer whether the government can make it a crime for them to have that relationship. Whether the government can enable people who are happily married to continue that relationship. Think of how you would feel?”
“Well Senator you’re implying that I’m poised to say that I want to cast a vote to overrule Obergefell and I assure you, I don’t have any agenda and I don’t, I’m not even expressing a view and disagreement of Obergefell, you’re pushing me to try to violate the judicial canons of ethics and to offer advisory opinions and I won’t do that.
Amy Coney Barrett refuses to answer @SenBlumenthal‘s question if Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage, was properly decided.
Blumenthal asks her to think about how she would feel if she were LGBTQ and heard a Supreme Court nominee decline to answer. pic.twitter.com/h3AdvFwqJM
— The American Independent (@AmerIndependent) October 14, 2020
Senator Cory Booker chastised Barrett on Tuesday over similar refusals.
“You seem to honor the precedents that are enough to protect discrimination against African Americans [and] interracial couples, but you stop on saying that unequivocally about … religious discrimination.”
Busted: Amy Coney Barrett ‘Lied’ to Dem Senator Over Her Ties to Anti-LGBTQ Hate Group Says Top Political Scientist
Judge Amy Coney Barrett is being accused of lying to a top Democratic Senator in an apparent attempt to hide her ties to and awareness of an anti-LGBTQ hate group that advocates for the re-criminalization of homosexuality and sterilization of transgender people.
Judge Barrett has been paid by and given speeches to the Alliance Defending Freedom, a law firm that appears on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s list of anti-LGBTQ hate groups. ADF advances its agenda by finding and litigating cases involving Christians who say they are being discriminated against for their faith by LGBTQ people, often same-sex couples.
He posted a devastating video (below) of him questioning Barrett in her 2017 judicial confirmation hearing. The video then cuts to this week’s confirmation hearing, with Senator Pat Leahy (D-VT) asking her about the Alliance Defending Freedom.
“Were you aware of ADF’s decades-long efforts to re-criminalize homosexuality?” Leahy asked Barrett on Tuesday.
“I am not aware of those efforts, no,” Barrett firmly responded.
Franken adds, “I questioned her about this in 2017. She spoke to them 5 times, took money from them, and is very, very, very aware of what they do.”
— Al Franken (@alfranken) October 14, 2020
Norman Orenstein, a top political scientist and a resident scholar at the conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute (AEI), says Barrett “lied.”
@SenatorLeahy asked Barrett if she was aware that this extremist group, to which she spoke 5 times, advocates criminalizing homosexuality. She said no. She was asked point blank about this by @alfranken in her earlier hearing. So she knew full well! SHE LIED TO LEAHY!
— Norman Ornstein (@NormOrnstein) October 14, 2020
- WTH?2 days ago
Donald Trump Jr. Says Dad’s ‘Next Move’ Is to ‘Break Up’ FBI: ‘He Has to Get Rid of These Things’
- 'RUDY G RUDY G'3 days ago
U.S. Officials Think Russia is Using Trump Lawyer Giuliani to Spread Lies About Hunter Biden
- GOOD LUCK WITH THAT24 hours ago
In ‘Rant’ Trump Tells Campaign Staffers ‘We’re Going to Win’ Then Promises to Do 5 Rallies a Day Until the Election
- MALPRACTICE1 day ago
Trump’s Top COVID Advisor Blocks Testing, Attacks Masks, But Says Americans Who Have Had a Cold Are Protected
- LOCK HIM UP?1 day ago
Bolton: ‘Trump Will Not Leave Graciously if He Loses’
- PRESIDENT DESPERATE23 hours ago
In Expletive-Filled Rant Trump ‘Irritably’ Orders Campaign Staff to ‘Ignore the B’ and ‘Work Your A’s Off’: Report
- FRAUD22 hours ago
Fox News Refused to Publish Giuliani’s ‘Sketchy’ Hunter Biden Emails Story
- SAD!19 hours ago
Trump Campaign Launches Lengthy and Inaccurate Objection to Debate Topics: ‘Only a Few Touch on Foreign Policy’