Where have all the morals gone?, page 1

Its clear to me that God wasnt pushed out of the US by athiests, they were used as scape goats. No, I think the covert work of the Satanists is responcible.

Another Email........

EXCERPTs:

"With the legal bastions crumbling, the barbarians unleashed
an all-out assault on every front. The entertainment and news media,
along with the radical teachers unions and the leftists in academia,
launched a nonstop bombardment deriding traditional mores and
glorifying the lewd, crude, rude, and
nude."

"Television sitcoms and dramas, along with the big-screen
movies, have become toxic wastelands of profanity, pornography, sexual
promiscuity, perversion, mindless violence, and nihilism.

"... and have mainstreamed social
pathologies into the new
"normalcy."

"There can be no longer any
question that the
"pro-choice" militants will
accept no restriction on their
"right" to kill
unborn babies right up to full-term
delivery, as the helpless infant exits the birth canal."

"In New Hampshire, a high school freshman was told that her
"abortion is homicide"
shirt was offensive to some students
and faculty and so school officials threatened her with suspension should
she not find a more "positive" way of expressing her beliefs.
This same school, however, actively
promoted just weeks earlier the pro-homosexual "National Day of
Silence," where students and
teachers expressed their pro-homosexual views by wearing rainbow ribbons
during school. School officials
apparently did not find this politically correct view
"offensive."
Shortly after the Thomas More Law
Center got involved, school officials agreed that the student had a right
to wear her pro-life shirt, even if they didn't like
it."
www.thenewamerican.com...
Morality Meltdown
by William F. Jasper
The culture
war waged by America's liberal elite has taken our society
far down the road to perdition. But it is not too late to turn
back.

Vol. 19, No. 11
June 2, 2003
Morality Meltdown
The battle for the soul of America
has reached a pivotal point. The tattered shreds of what remains of
Christian civilization are under assault as never before, yet who is
willing to stand in the breach against the attacking barbarian hordes?
Certainly not those who now pose as our political, moral, and spiritual
leaders. The ongoing public and shameful lynching of Senator Rick
Santorum (R-Pa.) is painful enough evidence of that.
For daring to speak against the militant homosexual lobby's perverse
agenda and growing power, Senator Santorum has been subjected to a
relentless barrage of hate and vitriol. It was to be expected that the
most vehement voices of the Lavender Left would go on the attack. Ditto
for the usual suspects among the liberal-left media and the Clintonite
Democrats. But that combined chorus could not have kept its ridiculous
refrain going for more than one news cycle except for the deafening
sounds of silence from those who claim to defend morality and family
values. The leadership of the Republican Party and many of the so-called
social conservative leaders have bailed out at one of the most crucial
junctures in the culture war. They have either sinned by silence or aided
and abetted the attackers by offering "defenses" of Santorum
that are so lame they do more harm than good.
What did the senator say that was so earth-shatteringly provocative? In
an April 22nd interview with the Associated Press concerning the U.S.
Supreme Court's review of a Texas law against sodomy, the Republican
lawmaker noted that "we have laws in states, like the one at the
Supreme Court right now," and that these laws "were there for a
purpose." Senator Santorum went on to
remark:

"And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to
consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you
have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the
right to adultery. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine
the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it
does."
That is the offensive statement that
launched a thousand screaming headlines and ranting diatribes! To
listen to the squeals of outrage from the perversity apologists, one
would think that the senator had endorsed the murder of Matthew Shepard
or called for rounding up and executing all homosexuals.
What is so remarkable about the present flap is
that Senator Santorum is being pilloried and flayed
for a statement so eminently reasonable and universally accepted
only a generation ago.

Even a decade ago, most politicians � even liberal Democrats -- would
have rushed to agree with Santorum's defense of mom-and-apple-pie
morality. Elected officials choosing to side with the sodomites would
have been on the defensive. Relatively few would have openly disagreed
with the view of homosexuality expressed in Sir William Blackstone's
famous Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765). Blackstone, who
greatly influenced the American Founding Fathers and who is still
reverently quoted in court decisions, described
sodomy as the "infamous
crime against nature � the very mention of which is a
disgrace." It is, said
Bllackstone, a gross crime
condemned "by the voice of
nature and of reason, and the express law of God."
Today this "infamous
crime" is being enshrined as a right, and champions of law and
morality are in danger of being prosecuted for "hate
crimes."
How is it
possible for such a radical sea change
to have taken place virtually overnight?

Battle Plan to Capture the Culture
The answer, of course, is that the revolution we are witnessing is
not the recent phenomenon it appears to be. Neither is it the result
merely of a natural, historical
cycle of moral decay. A
"culture war" has been raging all about us for many decades.
The forces of organized decadence are waging this war
according to the detailed battle
plans laid out by Italian Communist theoretician Antonio Gramsci in the
1920s and '30s.

The Gramscian strategy called for a long, patient march to capture
the cultural "mediating institutions" � the media, schools,
universities, churches, civic organizations, publishing, and
entertainment � to overturn
entrenched religious and cultural values.*
The 1960s sexual revolution was sown in
the 1940s and '50s. Alfred C. Kinsey figures prominently in that
revolution. With generous funding from the Rockefeller Foundation and
often promotion from the media elite, Kinsey's 1948 report, Sexual
Behavior in the Human Male, became a worldwide sensation and Kinsey
became the undisputed authority on human sexuality. However, as Dr.
Judith A. Reisman's explosive 1998 expose of Kinsey: Crimes &
Consequences revealed, Kinsey's research was not only fraudulent, but
some of its most provocative theses were based on absolutely abhorrent
criminal activity by Kinsey and his fellow sadomasochist
"researchers." Specifically, Kinsey and company carried
out numerous experiments in sexually torturing infants and young
children.
The "scientific"
findings of these pathetic sexual psychopaths were then used to attack
all legal restraints on sexual license.
The Rockefeller, Carnegie, and
Ford Foundations provided the funding for the American Law Institute's
Model Penal Code, which was based on Kinsey's reports and greatly
influenced by Kinsey'a revolutionary ACLU attorney, Morris Ernst. Mr.
Ernst claimed that "virtually every page of the Kinsey Report
touches on some section of the legal code," and once boasted
in an essay for Scientific Monthly that
"the Kinsey Report broke
through a mass of taboo."
That was no idle boast. The
Kinsey report has been cited in hundreds of court cases overturning state
and local ordinances. The Model Penal Code (MPC), completed in 1955, has
been adopted by many state legislatures � with disastrous results.

The MPC legal reforms have
eliminated and/or greatly reduced penalties for almost all sex crimes:
abortion, rape, statutory rape, seduction, adultery, fornication,
prostitution, sodomy, public indecency, and obscenity.
That's Entertainment?!
With the legal bastions
crumbling, the barbarians unleashed an all-out assault on every front.
The entertainment and news media, along with the radical teachers unions
and the leftists in academia, launched a nonstop bombardment deriding
traditional mores and glorifying the lewd, crude, rude, and nude.

The triumph of each new excess has
inspired even more audacious experimentation. Television sitcoms and
dramas, along with the big-screen movies, have become toxic wastelands
of profanity, pornography, sexual promiscuity, perversion, mindless
violence, and nihilism. TV programs from Dallas, Dynasty, Maude, and
The Golden Girls, to Hill Street Blues, Baywatch, Ally McBeal, South
Park, and Will and Grace have
mainstreamed social pathologies
into the new
"normalcy." Depravity
of every sort has been given new status on such acclaimed programs as The
Sopranos, Queer as Folk, Sex & the City, The Osbournes, and the
Howard Stern Show.
Following the 1999 shooting rampage at Columbine High School, a public
backlash against the entertainment industry's escalating degeneracy
forced Hollywood and the recording companies to feign reform and pretend
to have developed a social conscience. This fake concern should have
fooled nobody.
This summer
Hollywood is releasing an avalanche of sex and violence.
And its media allies are hyping these new offerings with unapologetic
praise.

A May 9th Entertainment Weekly article,
entitled "R-Restricted: They Shoot R-rated Movies, Don't
They?," noted in its subtitle that "Violence, Strong Language,
And Some Sexual Content Are Coming Back To A Theater Near You." And,
according to the magazine's reporter, Benjamin Svetkey, this is a
wonderful thing. "This summer," said Svetkey, "underage
moviegoers across the nation will get to do something they haven't done
in years: sneak into R-rated action movies." "After years of
PG-13-rated fluff filled with bloodless gunplay and an alarming paucity
of gratuitous nudity," he continued,
"� the big-budget R-rated
bone cruncher is ready for a gut splattering comeback."
What planet do Svetkey and his
ilk inhabit? "Fluff-filled"? "Bloodless gunplay"?
"Alarming paucity of gratuitous nudity"? Yes, according to the
self-anointed arbiters of popular culture,
the savage fare that has plagued
movie theaters over the past several years has been too tame and
wholesome.
Thus their ecstatic joy over the
new crop of hot properties: The Matrix Reloaded, T3: Rise of the
Machines, Bad Boys II, and Exorcist: The Beginning.
"People are being as
aggressive about R-rated movies as they've been in years,"
said Revolution Studios partner Rob Moore in the Entertainment
Weekly article. "Kids will
be getting lots more of the undiluted stuff in the future,"
Svetkey approvingly concluded,
"at least if the R-rated grosses this summer are as staggering as
expected."
The same issue of the magazine featured an article entitled "�X-Men
& Gay Men," celebrating Hollywood kudos to and from the
homosexual/lesbian community, including "out" homosexual actor
Alan Cumming, who played the mutant Nightcrawler in the new X-Men United
sci-fi action flick.
CNN's April 28th movie review of The Real Cancun is an all too
typical example of the major media's shameless promotion of unbridled
debauchery. The Real Cancun is a big-screen spin-off of the kind of
adolescent drunken revelry dished up weekly on MTV's Real World and other
so-called "reality TV" shows � but with even more explicit sex
and raunchiness. "This is the story of 16 strangers picked to
go on spring break in Cancun and have their lives taped,"
says CNN's Meriah Doty. "And their lives," notes
Doty, "consist of getting drunk on the beach, making out with random
people, waking up hung over the next day, and doing it all over
again."
This, says the CNN reviewer, is a show you should "run out to
the multiplex and spend money on." Why?
"Because," explains
Doty, "it's far more explicit � and dare I say, real � than even the
raunchiestest hot tub romps in the most recent "�Real World" in
Las Vegas. And that makes the movie a mindless, guilty
pleasure."
Thank you CNN!
At about the same time, on April 14th, Reuters news service reported
this cheery news: "Daytime television viewers � considered to
be among Ammerica's most conservative audiences � will see their first
on-screen lesbian kiss next week." According to the Reuters
story:
The kiss will take place during the April 22 episode of the Emmy-award
winning soap opera "All My Children," making what ABC said
would be a first in the world of daytime television. It comes in a scene
featuring gay teen character Bianca Montgomery (Eden Riegel), who came
out as a lesbian in 2000, and her new friend Lena (Olga Sosnovska), who
"in a moment of truth and true love � comes to terms with her
feelings."
So it goes, day in and day out, an
endless parade of depravity. Even
the once-venerated Disney label has been corrupted, as informed parents
have known for some time. In her keynote address to a 1998 conference of
the University of California Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered
Association, lesbian activist Elizabeth Birch told her audience:
"[W]hen I said to Michael Eisner, CEO of Disney, [that] "�30
percent of your employees are gay," he said, "You are wrong,
Elizabeth, "It'ss 40 [percent]."
A new book, Queens in the Kingdom: The Ultimate Gay & Lesbian
Guide to the Disney Theme Parks, by homosexuals Jeffrey Epstein and Eddie
Shapiro, celebrates Disney�'s new perversity diversity. The authors, who
describe themselves as "queer-as-a-$3-dollar-bill Jewish fags from
the Northeast," provide details on cruising the kingdom and secluded
sites in the Disney parks where "gays" can hook up, according
to reviews of the book.
Audacious Assaults on Morality
The deviant lobby will not let up
until they have completely eviscerated virtually all sex crime
laws. Indeed, in the Texas case
that Sen. Santorum referred to, the amicus brief filed by the ACLU, the
Human Rights Campaign and more than two dozen other pro-homosexual groups
argues for "the right to be free from governmental intrusion into,
and criminalization of, private sexual relations between consenting
adults." Likewise, Harvard Law professor Charles Fried, a supposed
conservative who served as President Reagan's solicitor general, asserts:
"To criminalize any enjoyment of their sexual powers by a
whole category of persons is either an imposition of a very great cruelty
or an exercise in hypocrisy inviting arbitrary and abusive applications
of the criminal law."
The sex liberationists will not brook any attempt to
"criminalize any enjoyment of their sexual powers" � including
incest, bestiality, bigamy, and polygamy. They are pushing hard now to
legalize pedophilia. Yes, as outrageous as that may sound, that is their
aim. Due to their pressure, the American Psychiatric Association removed
homosexuality from its list of psychopathologies in 1973,
and in 1995 pedophilia was
removed. They are trying now to
lower or abolish "age of consent" laws that prohibit
adult-child sex.
They are following the advice of French Revolutionist George Jacques
Danton, who counseled,
"Audacity, more audacity,
always audacity." This
is also their battle cry on every other front in the culture
war.
The bloody abortion front is a case in point, the recent Senate
battle over the partial birth abortion ban being a prime example of
unbridled audacity in action. After years of lying to the public about
the true extent of the abortion holocaust and claiming that they want the
murderous procedure to be kept "rare" and restricted to the
earliest stages of pregnancy, their true agenda has been fully
exposed.
There can be no longer any
question that the "pro-choice" militants will accept no
restriction on their "right" to kill unborn babies right up to
full-term delivery, as the helpless infant exits the birth
canal.
The fight for "abortion
rights" and "homosexual rights" are seamlessly
intertwined, with the same radical forces lined up behind both of
these anti-family, anti-Christian offensives. In both areas, the
revolutionaries are trying not only to upend completely our laws and
norms, but even to deny their opponents their right to freedom of
expression.
The recent experience with "National Pro-Life T-shirt Day"
illustrates the present situation. On April 28th, high school students
nationwide proudly wore T-shirts to school, expressing opposition to
abortion. Despite the clearly established right of students to express
their views in this manner, some students were forced to change their
shirts. Attorneys for the Thomas More Law Center, a national public
interest law firm, came to their defense.
The firm's online newsletter reports:
In New Hampshire, a high school
freshman was told that her "abortion is homicide" shirt was
offensive to some students and faculty and so school officials threatened
her with suspension should she not find a more "positive" way
of expressing her beliefs. This same school, however, actively promoted
just weeks earlier the pro-homosexual "National Day of
Silence," where students and teachers expressed their pro-homosexual
views by wearing rainbow ribbons during school. School officials
apparently did not find this politically correct view
"offensive." Shortly after the Thomas More Law Center got
involved, school officials agreed that the student had a right to wear
her pro-life shirt, even if they didn't like it.
Robert Muise, associate counsel
with the Thomas More Law Center handling the New Hampshire case,
commented, "The political correctness police are out in full
force in the public schools across this nation, seeking to suppress ideas
and messages that they oppose."
In virtually every state, the
same subversive forces are audaciously attacking once universally
revered organizations and institutions such as the Boy Scouts, the
Salvation Army, churches, and Christian charities. Cities and school
districts are denying the Boy Scouts access to facilities, and United Way
and other funding sources are cutting off contributions because the
Scouts refuse to accept "gay" men as leaders. Likewise, the
Salvation Army is being kicked off its hallowed pedestal in many
communities for refusing to hire active homosexuals and failing to adopt
same-sex "domestic partner" benefits for employees.
At the same time, the Gay, Lesbian
and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) has proudly announced that the
GLSEN-sponsored "Day of Silence" observed on April 9, 2003
"was the most successful and widely supported" in the event's
eight-year history. According to GLSEN, "an estimated 200,000
students from 2,000 registered middle and high schools participated this
year." For the second year in a row, U.S. Congressman Eliot
Engel (D-N.Y.) introduced a resolution calling on Congress to recognize
the efforts of students in organizing the Day of Silence. Also, for the
second year, California Governor Gray Davis officially recognized the Day
of Silence with a proclamation. Governors Jennifer Granholm of Michigan
and John Rowland of Connecticut also issued proclamations.
The Gramscian strategy, as it pertains to the homosexual revolution, was
described with great candor in After the Ball: How America Will
Conquer Its Fear & Hatred of Gays in the 90s, a 1989 manifesto
written by homosexual activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen.
"Gays must launch a
large-scale campaign," this deviant duo declared, "� to reach
straights througgh the mainstream media."
"We're talking about
propaganda," wrote Kirk and Madsen. They then described in
detail a sophisticated and insidious scheme to use the media to
"convert" America by enveloping the culture in pro-homosexual
messages. "By conversion
we actually mean something far more profoundly threatening to the
American way of life," the pervert propagandists boasted. "We
mean conversion of the average American's emotions, mind and will,
through a planned psychological
attack." The plan they
methodically spelled out has been implemented to the letter by virtually
all of the major media.
Architects of the New World Disorder
In the Winter 1996 issue of the Marxist journal Dissent, Michael Walzer
approvingly catalogued the many achievements of the Gramscian social
revolution, including: the "visible impact of
feminism"; the "emergence of gay rights";
and the "transformation of family life,"
including "rising divorce
rates, changing sexual mores, new household
arrangements." Mr. Walzer
also enthusiastically noted
"the fading of religion in
general and Christianity in particular from the public sphere �
classrooms, textbooks, legal coddes, holidays, and so
on."
These victories, in what he identified as
"the Gramscian war of
position," were brought
about, not by the revolutionary masses, but by the "liberal
elites," he noted.
This same point is made, but with decided disapproval, by the late
Christopher Lasch, historian, author, and perceptive social critic. In
his book, The Revolt of the Elites, Lasch blasted the same liberal elites
"who control the
international flow of money and information, preside over the
philanthropic foundations and institutions of higher learning, manage the
instruments of cultural production and thus set the terms of public
debate." These elites,
he charged, share a "venomous hatred" for "Middle
America," which, for them, "has come to symbolize everything
that stands in the way of progress: "�Family values," mindless
patriotism, religious fundamentalism...."
Who are these high-powered elites that, with the Marxist-Leninist
left, jointly detest the American middle class, the Christian religion,
and family values? We have examined and exposed them often in these
pages. They are concentrated most notably on the membership rolls of the
Rockefeller-dominated Council on Foreign Relations. They are the same
subversives who funded and promoted Kinsey's devastating revolution and
who continue to fund and promote every prong of that continuing attack
today. Consider this scathing (and very revealing) attack on truth and
Christian sensibility in the current (May/June 2003) issue of the CFR
journal Foreign Affairs:
Architects of an authentic new world order must therefore move beyond
castles in the air � beyond imaginary truths that transcend politics �
such as, for example, just war theory and the notion of the sovereign
equality of states. These and other stale dogmas rest on archaic notions
of universal truth, justice, and morality.... Medieval ideas about
natural law and natural rights ("nonsense on stilts," Bentham
called them) do little more than provide convenient labels for
enculturated preferences....
The author of that screed is Michael J. Glennon, professor of
international law at the prestigious Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy
at Tufts University.
"As the world moves into a new, transitional era, the old
moralist vocabulary should be cleared away so that decision-makers can
focus pragmatically on what is really at stake," Glennon
claims. The real questions these "decision-makers" � a select
group of self-anointed global visionaries coomposed of the likes of Prof.
Glennon, no doubt � must ask are: "Whaat are our objectives?";
and, "What means have we chosen to meet those
objectives?"
"Answering those
questions," says
Glennon, "does not
require an overarching legalist metaphysic."
"Humanity need not achieve
an ultimate consensus on good and evil," he continues. Indeed,
"Getting to a consensus," he avers, "will be accelerated
by dropping abstractions, [and] moving beyond the polemical rhetoric of
"right" and "wrong."
What is important to recognize is that the ongoing destruction of our
civilization and all we hold dear has not resulted from blind, historical
forces over which we have no control. We are not hopelessly
confronting the unavoidable, natural cycle of moral decline. We are under
vicious attack by a small, organized cadre of elite revolutionaries who
intend our utter obliteration. Yes, they have immense wealth, influence,
and power at their disposal. Yes, they have succeeded in spreading their
malignant depravity throughout our society and eroding much of our moral
fiber.
However, there is still sufficient residual strength and virtue in the
soul of America to defeat this cabal and reverse our nation'a moral
descent. To this end, every American worthy of the name should pledge his
life, his fortune, and his sacred honor.
###
* See "A Method to the Madness" in the October 23, 2000 issue
of THE NEW AMERICAN.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Traitors Within the Gates
by William F. Jasper
Traitors in Republican and "conservative" garb are undermining
our legal and moral foundations and opening the city gates to the
barbarians under the false banners of "tolerance" and
"inclusiveness."
The Santorum ordeal is emblematic of the multiple dangers that the forces
of decency and godly order face from within and without as we struggle
desperately to stop the enemies pushing our society toward the edge of
the abyss. Most of the invading barbarians can easily be identified: They
audaciously parade their debauchery and brazenly announce their intent to
bury our "outdated" morality. They would completely upend the
foundations of society � our laws, customs, habits, moral codes, and
religious beliefs. They have targeted marriage, the family, manhood,
womanhood, childhood, and parenthood for destruction. Their relentless
assaults come on many fronts: homosexuality, abortion, pornography,
drugs, obscenity, sexual promiscuity, paganism, occultism, and hedonism.
The barbarians open political allies are also easily identifiable; for
the most part, they wear the Democrat Party label.
It is not these open enemies, however, who present the greatest threat to
our liberty and moral order. As history has amply proven, the greater
danger always comes from traitors and false allies from within, who
weaken the nation’s defenses and undermine the resolve of the defenders
with counsels of compromise and conciliation.
The great Roman statesman Cicero warned more than two millennia
ago:
A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot
survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable,
for he is known and he carries his banners openly against the city. But
the traitor � rots the soul of a nation; he works secretly and unknown in
the night to undermine the pillars of a city; he infects the body politic
so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be
feared.
Yes, a murderer is less to be feared, for he can victimize only a
relative few. The traitor, on the other hand, would help the enemy seize
and victimize the entire nation. Cicero would have no trouble identifying
the traitors in Republican and "conservative" garb undermining
our legal and moral foundations and opening the city gates to the
barbarians under the false banners of "tolerance" and
"inclusiveness." Over the past several decades, these
subversives gradually have insinuated their camouflaged barbarian
co-conspirators into the midst of the true believers and adopted the
"big tent" gospel of inclusivity as dogma.
When the pundits in the "tolerance" choir sent up their
intolerant hue and cry against Santorum, the GOP leadership made a
strategic cave-in. In a screed typical of the liberal-left attack,
Eleanor Clift charged in an April 25th MSNBC/Newsweek on-line op-ed that
the senator, in a "flight of prejudice," had tripped over the
"fine line between stupidity and bigotry." Many Republicans
echoed her charges.
Clift also noted: "Bush knows that to break with Santorum would cost
him dearly with his conservative base." The president knew that, at
least on this point, Clift was right on. So he didn't "break with
Santorum," he just let the besieged senator twist in the wind. When
a reporter asked White House spokesman Ari Fleischer if the president
would comment on the matter, Mr. Fleischer displayed a firm grasp of
Clintonian verbal gymnastics. The president "never typically"
comments on Supreme Court cases, he asserted. When the reporter responded
that Bush had commented considerably on the Michigan affirmative-action
case currently before the court, Fleischer replied, "That's
why I said � typically." The White House spokesmman then offered
what was supposed to pass for presidential support for the embattled
loyalist senator. President Bush, said Fleischer, considers Santorum to
be "an inclusive man."
The message could not have been clearer: Republicans were being signaled
to get in line with the party’s "big tent" gospel of
"gay" inclusion. "Keeping the tent big is always a
work-in-progress," said Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.), who had earlier
issued a statement criticizing Santorum's remarks. Calling for diversity
in the party, Smith said "Rick [Santorum] represents the continued
views of many Republicans, but certainly not a majority of Republicans.
He should not be excluded from the Party because of his views." Oh,
how tolerant and inclusive! Senator Smith and his diversity disciples
charitably deign not to banish unenlightened Republicans who still cling
to antiquated notions like those expressed by Santorum. But not for long.
Smith seized this opportunity to introduce new "hate crime"
legislation he co-sponsored with Democrat Senators Edward Kennedy (Mass.)
and Richard Durbin (Ill.), and fellow liberal Republican Arlen Specter
(Pa.). According to Sen. Durbin, Senate Republicans could earn
"redemption" for Santorum’s supposedly heinous offense by
passing this legislation.
Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.) came up with a similar gem of support for
his beleaguered colleague. "Everybody likes Rick Santorum,"
said Chafee, who also had criticized Santorum'as comments. "Reject
what he said, but like him as a person." Yes, we'll all just have to
put up with these religious Neanderthals � for a while at least. Just
don't pay serious attention to their nonsensical beliefs about fixed
ideas of right and wrong.
Other Republicans offered similar statements of "support" that
were just as pathetic and weak-kneed. All of which could only delight the
homosexual lobby. The GOP was essentially saying the same thing as
Santorum’s more overt attackers, but placing more emphasis on stupidity
than bigotry.
###
*COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107,

any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use
without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior
interest
in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and
educational purposes only.[Ref.
www.law.cornell.edu...
]