The Patriot Post® · LGBT Activists Attempt to Hijack GOP Platform
When the gavel fell in Cleveland [Tuesday] evening, delegates at the Republican platform committee had succeeded in crafting one of the most conservative GOP platforms in modern times. Not all were celebrating the clearly enunciated conservative principles that underscored the party’s pro-military, pro-life, pro-natural marriage, pro-religious freedom stands. In the concluding moments of the platform gathering, a small group of delegates were engaged in an outright deceptive effort to derail the platform and potentially the convention. After repeated efforts to redefine marriage for the Republican Party and interject special LGBT provisions in the platform, an effort was launched to create a Minority Report promoting items for an LGBT agenda, under the guise of creating a preamble for the platform from the 1860 Republican platform.
As soon as the proceedings concluded, the initiators of this effort announced to CNN that 37 delegates had signed on to a call for a Minority Report that would circumvent the process and put the platform onto the floor of next week’s convention, potentially derailing the GOP gathering. David Barton was one of the delegates who was misled into signing the resolution. He wrote a letter to delegates [Tuesday] night explaining what took place and urging others who may have been lied to, to remove their names from the resolution.
The use of such deception is not surprising, given the tactics of LGBT activists. Social media, fueled by anti-Christian organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center, has been abuzz that I added language to the GOP platform that has embraced “reparative therapy” for homosexuals. Nothing provides a clearer example of both their dishonesty and their self-absorption. Here is the exact language that I added to the platform under the subsection of “Protecting Individual Conscience in Health Care:”
“We support the right of parents to determine the proper medical treatment and therapy for their minor children. We support the right of parents to consent to medical treatment for their minor children and urge enactment of legislation that would require parental consent to transport their daughters across state lines for abortion.”
The subcommittee adopted the language without any opposition — even from a LGBT activist who was on the subcommittee and leading the effort for Paul Singer, the wealthy Republican donor.
Despite the deceptive and desperate attempts by those who want to undermine the Republican Party’s longstanding support for the traditional family values that have made America the envy of the world, the GOP’s stand for these values is stronger than ever.
Here is a bit more information that I am pretty confident you will not read in media reports. Those attempting to change the party’s stand on marriage and morality repeatedly claimed that they represented the next generation, and that the party could not hold these views and survive. What was interesting is that with the exception of maybe one delegate making those claims, they were my age or older. But in contrast, those who passionately and successfully advanced natural marriage and traditional values in the platform were mostly conservative millennials. Once again, I challenge you not to believe what the media and the Left claim about the next generation. Keep training them up to stand firm in the truth.
Stay tuned. I’ll have more from Cleveland as the FRC Action Team continues to represent you and the values that make America — America.
Originally published here.
Survey Shows Americans’ Bathroom Break with President
If President Obama was hoping to make showers and locker rooms a campaign issue, brand new polling provides more evidence that he succeeded. But not in the way he intended. A WPA Research survey commissioned by Family Research Council Action finds that two thirds (66 percent) of Americans disapprove of “government forcing schools, businesses, and non-profit organizations to open the showers, changing facilities, locker rooms, and bathrooms designated for women and girls, to biological males and vice versa.” Only 28 percent approved — with just 15 percent strongly approving.
Democratic voters in the survey were deeply divided over the issue. Forty-six percent disapprove of the Obama edict compared to 45 percent giving approval. The survey found double-digit opposition to the edict among millennials (55 percent to 37 percent) while 64 percent of Independents were opposed.
[Tuesday], we released the poll results just as the Republican Party’s platform committee began considering the issue. As a platform delegate from Louisiana, I pointed out that elected officials in 23 states, prompted by the privacy and safety concerns of parents and school officials, have sued to stop President Obama’s locker room/bathroom mandate. Delegates quickly dismissed efforts from a handful of LGBT activists and supporters and voted overwhelmingly to put the party on record as opposed to the edict. The delegates, like most Americans, are alarmed that the president has ignored these repeatedly expressed concerns in the pursuit of his radical agenda, which trample the boundaries of his constitutional power.
If the White House can dictate the policies for every school locker room, shower, and bathroom in America, what could possibly be beyond its reach? While this lame-duck president is blindly obsessed with forcing government in every area of society — even into showers and locker rooms — let’s hope more elected leaders will join these 23 states in standing up for the safety and privacy of children.
Originally published here.
Opposition Not Fading After FADA Concession
During oral arguments at the Supreme Court last year regarding the same-sex redefinition of “marriage,” the Solicitor General of the U.S. was asked if a religious school might lose tax-exempt status for opposing such a redefinition. “It’s certainly going to be an issue,” he admitted. To head off such discrimination by the federal government, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Rep. Raul Labrador (R-Idaho) introduced the First Amendment Defense Act (“FADA”) to prohibit the federal government from discriminating against those who believe in one-man, one-woman marriage. This FRC-supported proposal, H.R. 2802, finally got a hearing Tuesday in the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
FRC’s Peter Sprigg attended the hearing, in which a panel of supporters emphasized the limited scope of the bill’s provisions in only protecting against government discrimination. Opponents had particular difficulty with countering the testimony of former Atlanta fire chief Kelvin Cochran, an African-American who overcame racial discrimination early in his career, but ended up being fired by Atlanta’s liberal mayor because a few lines in a 160-page book he wrote on his own time and his own expense for a men’s Bible study expressed support for a biblical view of marriage and sexuality. As has become the modus operandi of the liberals, they ignored the facts of a real-life example of government discrimination, and offered instead a series of hysterical hypotheticals and scenarios they claim would be triggered by the bill.
Unfortunately, the proposed language of FADA was changed late last week by bill sponsors in response to criticism to make it protect the view that marriage is the union of “two individuals of the same sex” as well as the view that it is “two individuals of the opposite sex.” The hearing made clear that this “two views” approach has done nothing to mitigate opposition to or win support for FADA. The Court’s ruling and the Obama administration are already promoting such views, but natural marriage supporters are not protected from government punishment at all. Rep. Bonnie Waston Coleman’s (D-N.J.) commented that this “two views” version of FADA, which was meant to appease the Left, is a “facade.” It is unfortunate that the bill sponsors decided to affirm the Court’s redefinition when it is clear the Left does not want a live and let live policy that the original version of FADA supported. That policy and reference to FADA’s nondiscrimination protections for supporters of natural marriage was added in two places to the conservative GOP platform! Members of Congress should not be asked to implicitly affirm the Supreme Court’s illegitimate decision in Obergefell v. Hodges in order to protect religious liberty or conscience rights, a message that was clearly articulated in the GOP platform this week. Because of the weakened language of the bill, FRC has reluctantly withdrawn its support for FADA.
Originally published here.