Friday, March 30, 2007

Blog Closed by Executive Order

Fellow Iowans:
I regret to inform you that, due to its homophobic content, I have instructed my newly created WSM (Welcoming Speech Ministry) to lock this blog to prevent further posts by its owner. The authority for me to do this comes from the new "Fair Speech" law, which is Iowa Code Section, uh, well, we haven't actually passed that law yet, but it is coming down the pike. However, due to the hateful and bigoted nature of this blog, I cannot wait for a technicality in order to enforce this law. I'm sure you agree.

Recent polls show that 59% of Iowans believe this kind of intolerant and offensive speech should be stopped at all costs. 11 other states have taken such action against blog posters, and it is time for Iowa to do so also. I know you share my concern that someone might be offended because some intolerant religious fanatic thinks freedom of speech means he can publicly say that homosexuality is immoral. That's just wrong and we're not going to allow it in this state!

Now, I'm going to ask for your help to make Iowa (and the Internet) an even more welcoming place. Our new WSM only has a staff of 150 and a budget of $32 million, so we are going to need the cooperation of every Iowan. If you see a blog, or other website, that you can determine is based in Iowa which portrays any of the following behaviors (real or perceived) in any way that is not positive--gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, transexual, transvestite, cross dressing, gender identity, questioning, etc.--please bring it to our attention immediately. E-mail the offensive link to, and the problem will be "resolved" within 24 hours.

Thank you for your participation. As a result of your effort, Iowa will be a safer and more welcoming place for all people.


Note: If you are a minor, you are welcome to be a part of this important effort. Be assured that if your parents are jailed for their hate speech, you will be placed in a good, loving home where you won't have to worry about having antiquated, intolerant religious beliefs forced down your throat.

***NOTE - The above is fiction now, but could become reality in the near future if we allow the liberals to continue to take us further in the direction they have been taking us since assuming total control of the Iowa Statehouse***

Thursday, March 29, 2007

Danielson Tells a Citizen He Has Hate in His Heart

This is an excerpt from the legislative forum held March 10, 2007. There is too much misinformation and propaganda in this video to address it all here, but let me hit on a couple of points:

-Danielson said there is a "whole host of enumerated traits" in the Fourteenth Amendment. There are no enumerated traits in the Fourteenth Amendment. The framers wanted the rights to apply equally to everyone, without carving out certain categories of people more worthy of protection than others. You would think a legislator charged with upholding the Constitution, and who bases his votes on the Constitution, would at least know what it says!

-Senator Dotzler's comment that an employer could fire an employee who didn't adhere to a dress code was technically right, but didn't address the specific question. An employer could have a dress code prohibiting employees from wearing dresses/skirts, makeup, etc. But if he allowed the female employees to wear them, he could not prohibit the males from also wearing them.

I would like to see more Republicans/conservatives/Christians attend these forums, rather than have 90%+ of the audience be liberal Democrats, and 90%+ of those be from the education establishment.

Thursday, March 22, 2007

It's GAYLA Week at Wartburg!

Wartburg College, in Waverly, Iowa, is holding its 2nd Annual Gayla Week. Wartburg is afflliated with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), a liberal denomination that is becoming even more liberal, abandoning God's word in the process. A spokesman from Wartburg once told me that Wartburg is not a Lutheran college, but a college operated by the Lutheran Church. Huh? In any case, I think Martin Luther would grieve that such a college is being operated by a denomination that was founded based on his teachings.

What concerns me perhaps more than the "Drag In The City Cabaret Show" is how the Waterloo Courier reports on one of the celebration's speakers. Story here. Notice how the word "homophobia" is used without quotes and without identifying it as the opinion of the author (neither the author being reported on nor the author of the Courier piece). In other words, the Courier's objectivity (and that of most other media) is out the window on this issue.

I have known for quite some time that the media, in general, is helping to advance the homosexual agenda but, for some reason, when I read that article it really sank in. When you see it happening in your local paper, it really hits home.

They just throw the word out there like any normal and rational person would accept that 1) there is a condition called "homophobia", 2) it is a widespread problem in this country, and 3) anyone identified as a "homophobe" should be punished and/or sent for "sensitivity" training. You might think that "homophobia" would mean "fear of homosexuals" or "fear of homosexuality", but you would be wrong. The way that homosexual activists and their allies define a "homophobe" is anyone who doesn't accept that homosexuality is normal and morally equal to the sexual relationship between a married man and woman.

I know it seems that I focus on this subject a lot, but I consider it to be the greatest threat to our religious freedom that we face. Not only that, but the children in the public schools will be indoctrinated (ARE being indocrinated) with pro-homosexual beliefs This means that, within a generation, we could live in a culture where the vast majority of people consider homosexual behavior to be normal, natural, moral, and equivalent (if not superior) to heterosexual relations. And anyone who dares to say homosexual acts are sinful will not only be called names like "homophobe", religious fanatic, hateful, and bigoted. They will also be considered ignorant throwbacks to an era when people were unenlightened on this matter. They will be seen not only as intolerant, but dangerous.

To be honest, I think we have lost the battle to prevent the normalization and acceptance of homosexuality, unless God miraculously intervenes. But that doesn't mean that we have to go quietly! I pray that God will raise up a legion of pastors, as well as Christian leaders and laymen, who have the boldness to stand for His word. We should show love and compassion toward all, but we should not stand by silently while sin--any sin--is being written into law by giving a protected class status to those who practice it.

Wednesday, March 21, 2007

Am I my brother's....wife?!

Here is more vindication for those of us who warned that considering homosexual behavior to be a civil right would be a slippery slope that would lead to calls for legal recognition of other aberrant sexual behaviors (i.e., sexual relations other than between one man and one woman in marriage). Critics accused us of using fear tactics when we asked what would prevent polygamists from making the case that their civil rights were being violated. Homosexual activists dismissed those claims as the rantings of "homophobes". However, we are now seeing polygamists pushing for their "civil rights" based on the gains made by homosexuals.

Now comes something even more insidious that I have also been warning people about. Once we normalize homosexuality, where do you draw the line? Homosexual acitivists who try to shoot down arguments against same-sex "marriage" will say that the line should be drawn by limiting it to two people who are in love and want to share their lives together. OK, let's run with that. But now we have a case of a incestuous relationship. A brother and sister are living in a sexual relationship and have borne children. Chuck Colson reports on this case in his column today, entitled Saw This One Coming.

When the German government found 0ut about the relationship, they took away three of the couple's four children, and jailed the father/brother/husband for incest. Now, the couple is challenging the law in Germany's Federal Constitutional Court. Some of the arguments the couple is making sound eerily familiar:

"this law is out of date, and it breaches the couple's civil rights"

"couple [is] not harming anyone"

the ban "is discrimination"

"Why are disabled parents" or "people with hereditary diseases [and] women over 40" allowed to have children? (this in response to the argument that incest produces children at a higher risk to be born with a disability)

Do you recognize any of those arguments? They have all been made in the push for same-sex "marriage" in this country. The homosexual equivalent to the last argument is how they respond when it is held that one reason for marriage being only between one man and one woman is because that union can produce children, while same-sex "marriage" will not. They will ask, "If that is the case, then why are opposite-sex couples allowed to marry who, for whatever reason, will never be able to have kids?"

How will the homosexual activists respond to a couple who says it is their civil right to have an incestuous relationship? How can they say incest (or polygamy, or anything else for that matter) is wrong? Will they affirm family members being married to one another, or will they further try to refine the definition of marriage, but not so narrowly that it excludes them?

This is happening in Germany now, but we are fooling ourselves if we think it won't eventually come to our shores, especially when the US Supreme Court relies on laws and decisions in foreign countries to arrive at their decision.

This is just one more reason why you should contact your legislator and ask them to vote against adding "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" to Iowa's civil rights code.

Tuesday, March 20, 2007

That's gay!

I don't advocate the use of that phrase in a derogatory manner; I just want to say it while I still can! There is a movement in this country (which, like usual, is starting in California) to ban that phrase in schools.

The vast majority of students who use the phrase don't use it as a derogatory slur toward homosexuals, but rather in place of a phrase like, "That's lame" or "That's silly". However, the thought police in at least one school--and there will be others--have decided that the use of that phrase constitutes "sexual harassment" and is therefore a serious enough offense that they suspended a fourth-grade student for saying it. Read story here.

I wonder if the administrators at that school would suspend a student for making a derogatory statement about Christians? Somehow I doubt it. The radar of the speech Nazis seems to only pick up on words that are perceived to be derogatory toward "gays".

This type of infringement of free speech rights is just one of the reasons many of us opposed Iowa's "Bully Bill". Many schools in Iowa will no doubt ban the phrase "That's gay" or "That's so gay". I know this because one of the biggest arguments that was used for this law, and for bullying/harassment policies in the local school districts, is that "gay" students hear that phrase several times every day, and that constitutes bullying or harassment. This from a study commissioned by GLSEN that is trotted out at every opportunity, and is the foundation on which many state lawmakers and school board members based their decision to support a bullying/harassment policy that would include "sexual orientation".

Click here to visit the NEA (National Education Association)

Monday, March 19, 2007

Character-building message acceptable...unless the messengers happen to be Christian

This story is about a week old, but I felt it important to cover it anyway, in case you hadn't heard about it from another source. It seems that now we have gotten to the point that not only can't a Christian group come into a school to give a religious message, they can't even come in and give a secular message! This according to a recent editorial in the Ames Tribune, written in response to the appearance of the Power Team at Ames Middle School.

This view was shared by Iowa state Representative, Beth Wessel-Kroeschell, who claims to be a Christian, but says, "we would not endorse this interpretation of Christianity." What "interpretation" of Christianity is that, Representative? Biblical Christianity? She also said, "not every family attending the Ames Middle School is a Christian. This assembly definitely verges on a civil rights violation."

Wow! A civil rights violation?! That's pretty serious! Explain to me again, Representative, how bringing a positive, character-building, non-religious message "verges on a civil rights violation"? I think I can say with some certainty that you won't see a "civil rights violation" when the homosexual agenda is shoved down the students' throats. After all, didn't you vote for the "Bully Bill", which will do just that?

The Tribune made the statement that, "(Superintendent) Beyea is right in that the schools do have enough on their hands just fulfilling their own mission." you suppose they would say that if the object of controversy was an assembly bringing a message of tolerance for homosexuality conducted by GLSEN, GLBT Youth in Iowa Schools Task Force, or a school's Gay-Straight Alliance? Not likely! You see, such platitudes are only applicable when the secular left disagrees with your position. They have no problem finding a place for indoctrination they support.

Friday, March 16, 2007

More on Deerfield High

In response to a poster (thanks, Activist Scott), here is more info concerning the story I blogged about in my previous post. Story here. It appears that the panel is part of a mandatory class that all freshmen are required to take.

This is just one of many examples I could post where students are being indoctrinated with homosexual behavior. Unless something changes radically, and soon, we will see this happening more and more.

There has been a huge cultural shift in this country in the last few years. It is now virtuous to proclaim your homosexuality, and it is noble to help promote the homosexual agenda. Perhaps, people who missed out on the civil rights movement of the 60's see this as a similar cause (it is NOT) that they can latch onto and feel like they are making the world a better, more "tolerant" place.

Thursday, March 15, 2007

Don't tell....don't tell!

Parents of students at one Illinois high school were shocked to learn that, not only did the school require their 9th-grade kids to attend mandatory Gay-Straight Alliance panel discussions about the homosexual experiences of upperclassmen, but also required the students to sign a confidentiality agreement saying they wouldn't tell anyone about the discussions, including their parents! Read story here.

This is a blatant disregard of parental rights, and one reason many of us fought the "Bully Bill". Once "sexual orientation" is written into a school district's policy, the district will feel obligated to indoctrinate kids about the homosexual lifestyle, under the guise of promoting "understanding and tolerance".

If the proposed bill that would add "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" to the state's civil rights code passes, this kind of mandatory indoctrination will move from the schoolhouse to many other areas of our lives. Let your legislator know you oppose adding these categories to our civil rights law

Wednesday, March 14, 2007

Homosexuality is a civil right?

Tomorrow is designated "Civil Rights Lobby Day" at the Iowa Capitol by the groups pushing the homosexual agenda. Wake up folks! Our rights and liberties are fading away with each new piece of legislation that writes homosexuality (specifically "sexual orientation" and "gender identity") into law. Schools are indoctrinating students into this lifestyle without giving parents an opportunity to opt their kids out. Employees who don't accept the celebration of homosexuality are being disciplined and fired. Public officials who say homosexual acts are immoral are attacked, and their resignation is often demanded. And it will only get worse.

If this law passes, employers will be unable to prevent male employees from dressing and making themselves up to look like females, churches and other religious institutions will be forced to hire individuals who--contrary to the beliefs of the institution--are in the homosexual lifestyle (with the only exception being for positions that have "bona fide" religious qualifications), and public establishments may be required to provide a third (or fourth) restroom for those who claim a different sexual identity than that with which they were born.

If you are opposed to making homosexuality a civil right, and all that will result from that, contact your legislator as soon as possible. The bill in question is SF427 / HF603.

Sunday, March 11, 2007

Bite tongue, engage brain before speaking

At a forum for Black Hawk County legislators held yesterday at the AEA 267 building, State Senator Jeff Danielson lost his cool, telling a citizen at the microphone that he (the citizen) had "hate" in his heart. What brought forth such a strong judgment from Danielson? The constituent merely asked how a proposed bill that Danielson supports would affect his business.

The bill would add "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" to the list of protected classes in the state's civil rights code. The business owner questioned what he would be able to do if a male employee decided to come to work dressed as a female. He also wondered if such a person would have to be allowed to use the women's restroom, or if a third (or fourth) restroom would need to be added to accommodate men who define themselves as female (and possibly women who define themselves as male)?

Among the several inaccurate and/or disingenuous comments made in response to the questions the business owner asked, one of the most blatant was the statement by Danielson that the Fourteenth Amendment "basically guarantees equal protection under the law for a whole host of enumerated traits". Someone needs to tell the senator that 1) "Sexual orientation" and "gender identity" are not "traits", 2) the Fourteenth Amendment has no "enumerated traits", but rather says "any person", and 3) the proposed law would actually be in violation of the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, as it provides greater protection to some people than it does to others.

It is sad to think that a person with a Bachelor's Degree in Public Administration, a Master's Degree in Public Policy, and who is serving as the President Pro Tempore of the Iowa State Senate, does not have an accurate understanding of this important amendment to our Constitution, especially when it will influence how he votes on laws. He stated at the meeting that he took an oath of office to "uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America". How can he do that if he doesn't even know what the Constitution and its Amendments say?

Or, do you suppose he really does know, but assumes his constituency is too ignorant to know?

I'll write more on this issue in coming days.

Saturday, March 10, 2007

Friday, March 9, 2007

Why wait until the last minute to implement a bad bill?

Unable to wait until the September 1 deadline Iowa school districts have to comply with the "Bully Bill" he signed into law earlier this week, an excited Governor Chet Culver demonstrates on a Waterloo elementary school child how he would protect students from bullies. The governor did not indicate if hard hats were to be issued to all students, or only students falling in one of the categories enumerated in the law.

Thursday, March 8, 2007

Not to further muddy the waters, but...

John Cox is a long-shot candidate, but one who also deserves a look from conservatives. I've been impressed every time I have heard him talk. I think I am on the same page with him on just about all the issues.

Wednesday, March 7, 2007

More From San Diego "Pride" Parade...If You Can Handle It

I wanted to share a bit more about the parade I mentioned in the previous post, so you can fully appreciate what these kids will be exposed to. Here is a description from their own website at

"The Pride Parade is a powerful display of diversity, acceptance and celebration. Thousands of Parade participants move with flamboyant splendor on the mile long route with their gay banners waving above the exuberant caravan of lavish floats, drag mavens in fancy duds, dykes on bikes and gay-friendly politicians, sponsors, and civic organizations. Over three hours, the streets of Hillcrest burst with colorful displays of pride amid music and dancing emanating from the 200 parade contingents. 150,000 enthusiastically cheering spectators lining the Parade route, the Pride Parade is a highlight of the Celebration."

School Proud to March in Homosexual Parade

The San Diego Cooperative Charter School, a K-8 school, is participating in that city's annual parade of homosexual depravity. Despite pleas from a group of parents, as well as the fact that a lot of immoral behavior is displayed in the parade that kids ought not to see, the school has refused to reconsider its position, and the San Diego school board has refused to intervene.

Read story here.

More and more schools are going beyond just promoting "tolerance" of students who are different, and are becoming advocates for the homosexual agenda. And they are refusing parents the right to opt their kids out of such indoctrination. The only option for concerned parents is homeschooling or private school, though even private schools are also starting to be forced to promote the homosexual lifestyle (see Iowa's "Bully Bill", signed into law by Governor Culver on March 5, 2007).

It would seem that, with the educational system in the shambles it is, they would focus on what is supposed to be the purpose of public education in the first place--to teach our kids academic subjects--not to promote an agenda that the majority of Americans have a problem with. When did the educational system decide it was going to be an agent for social change? Oh, yeah, maybe when it was taken over by the NEA (National Education Association).

An excellent commentary (mp3 audio) on the homosexual agenda can be found on Jan Mickelson's show of this past Monday, March 5, 2007. The commentary starts about 32 minutes into the program. "Mickelson in the Morning" is broadcast on WHO Radio - 1040 on your AM dial , out of Des Moines, Monday through Friday, 9:00 a.m. - 11:30 a.m. local time.

Monday, March 5, 2007

Bully For You, Governor!

Amid much fanfare, surrounded by a crowd of the usual suspects, Governor "Big Lug" Culver signed the "Bully Bill" into law today at Valley High School in West Des Moines. Story here. I think it no coincidence that this is the school where the propaganda play "The Laramie Project" was performed recently.

This bill was never about bullying, but about using the power of the state to force citizens to not only tolerate homosexual behavior, but to affirm it. If it was really about preventing bullying of all students, as opposed to advancing the homosexual agenda, they would have left out the categories and required that school district policies cover ALL students. Couple this with the fact that school districts already had all the tools they needed to prevent bullying, and the fact that there are no enforcement "teeth" in this law, and you will realize that it is about writing homosexuality into the state code as a protected behavior. And this is just the first step. Stay tuned for breaking developments!

In discussion with liberals, you will often hear them accuse conservative Christians of "trying to shove their morals" down everyone else's throats. But let's assess the situation. Are we the ones who are trying to change the standards? No! It is the liberals, in this case specifically relating to homosexuality, who are trying to change the norm.

Until recently, everyone knew homosexuality was sinful. To recognize those who practice it as a class to be defined and protected by law, and for same-sex marriage and civil unions to be recognized in this society, is something that couldn't have been imagined just a few short years ago. And now, it is being forced upon us. And those of us who just want to maintain the values we have always had in this culture--indeed, in the entire civilization--are somehow the villains. Right has become wrong, and wrong has become right in this morally corrupt society in which we live today.

Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil;
Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness;
Who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
The New King James Version. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1982, S. Is 5:20

Saturday, March 3, 2007

Big Brother is Coming Closer to Home (literally!)

You may or may not be aware of a bill introduced in the statehouse known as Senate File 210. What this bill does is provide for home visits to every home in the state with a newborn child. According to the bill, "The components of the home visit shall include but are not limited to assessing the child's home environment*, educating the families concerning newborn children, and assisting families in accessing appropriate services." Read the bill here: SF 210

The wording of this bill seems to indicate that it is voluntary at this point, but how long would it be before it would be mandatory? And even if it remains voluntary, is this an additional role that we want our government to assume, using our tax dollars? The visits would be coordinated by the "Iowa Empowerment Board".

Couple this with the push for preschool for every 3-, 4-, and 5-year-old who is not in kindergarten, as well as raising the compulsory age for high school students, and you can see the state wants more and more time to indoctrinate our kids. The State is literally trying to make sure they control every aspect of our life, from cradle to grave (or womb to tomb, if you prefer).

*I wonder whose standards will be used to "assess the child's home environment"?

Friday, March 2, 2007

A sad commentary on our society.

I happened to see a portion of Anna Nicole Smith's funeral while working out at the gym. In a lavish procession that seemed more fitting for a head of state than the star of a reality show, her body was taken to its final resting place

Despite living an immoral lifestyle, Anna was idolized by many. At her funeral, some in the crowd even shouted, "Anna! Anna! We love you!", as her body passed by.

The cable news networks have covered the Anna Nicole Smith story virtually wall-to-wall, 24/7 ever since she died. It is no wonder that more people know who she is than who the vice president of our country is!

What is it about celebrities--even ones that lead an immoral lifestyle--that draws people like moths to a flame, and makes them crave the type of media coverage given to Anna Nicole? Are these celebrities the kind of people we should be looking up to as role models? Exactly what is it about Anna that makes her so admirable to so many? Was it her wealth, her looks, or the fact that she lived life on her own terms--without much concern about right or wrong?

My guess is that it is the last choice. Man is rebellious by nature. Submission and obedience do not come easily for us. By nature, we want to live our lives as we choose, without anyone setting any rules or boundaries for us. When we see someone who has lived her life that way, many find it admirable.

I think it is a sad commentary that so many people are so obsessed with celebrities, when they could be focusing that time and effort on their own lives and being concerned with worthy causes and with real people in their own communities who would benefit from their efforts.

What I'm saying is that we should live in our own reality, not that of some self-obsessed, egotistic "celebrity" who is more fantasy than reality. If more people would spend as much time working on the details of their own lives as they do wanting to know every detail of a celebrity's life, our society would be much better off.

Thursday, March 1, 2007

Huckabee just might have a chance...

Is Mike Huckabee now a "top-tier" presidential candidate? Read the article at the link below and decide.

Congressman says Huckabee a top-tier GOP candidate