Category Archives: First Amendment

Obama threatens Christians: “Gay rights” come before your constitutional right to religious freedom

A couple of months ago one Sunday morning, I arrived early at church and found the presiding priest — an orthodox and reverent priest — graciously standing outside to greet parishioners. There was no one around, so we began chatting.

Father X spontaneously said something very interesting. He said that, after the 2016 elections, Catholic priests will be imprisoned in the United States for defending their faith.

I questioned his timing. Referring to the creature occupying the White House, I said, “He won’t wait till the 2016 elections. He still has one and a half years to wreak more destruction on this country.”

Then I quoted — a quote with which Fr. X was even more familiar than I was — what the late Archbishop of Chicago Cardinal Francis George said in 2010 about the perilous state of religious freedoms in the United States (and across the western world):

“I expect to die in bed, my successor will die in prison and his successor will die a martyr in the public square.”

Cardinal George’s prophesy isn’t so far-fetched given what Obama recently proclaimed.

Barely hours after Pope Francis emphasized the importance of religious freedom in his speech to the United Nations, as Francis was en route in his flight back to Rome, Obama delivered a “F-you” by declaring a war against Christianity and against the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, declaring that homosexual “rights” come before any rights to religious freedom.

Obama at LGBT fundraiser in NY, Sept. 27, 2015.

Charlie Spiering reports for Breitbart that in a speech at a LGBT fundraiser in New York City on Sunday (Sept. 27, 2015) night, Obama praised the progress made on “gay rights” under his administration. He crowed:

“We affirm that we cherish our religious freedom and are profoundly respectful of religious traditions. But we also have to say clearly that our religious freedom doesn’t grant us the freedom to deny our fellow Americans their constitutional rights.”

Obama then accused Republicans of using the religious freedom issue just to earn more votes, as they did in 2004, and boasted that “America has left the leaders of the Republican Party behind.”

He then singled out three GOP presidential contenders for ridicule:

  • Dr. Ben Carson, for suggesting that “prison turns you gay.”
  • Sen. Ted Cruz, for saying he would introduce a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.
  • Gov. Mike Huckabee, for saying that Americans should just disobey the Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage. Obama mocked Huckabee, “I’m sure he loves the Constitution — except for Article III. And maybe the Equal Protection Amendment. And 14th Amendment, generally.”

Obama proudly told the audience (that included DNC chair Debbie Wasserman-Shultz and actor George Takei) that he would not back down in his efforts to make progress for the LGBT community, and called for all of them to remain vigilant to hold the line on important legal gains in the country. “What makes America special is, is that though sometimes we zig and zag, eventually hope wins out,” he said. “But it only wins out because folks like you put your shoulder behind the wheel and push it in that direction.”

See also “Judicial Tyranny: Dissenting opinions on Supreme Court’s ruling on homosexual marriage.”


Christians are leaving the U.S. military

Convoy duty

Jacqueline Klimas reports for The Washington Times, April 15, 2015, that Christians are leaving the U.S. military or are discouraged from joining in the first place because of a “hostile work environment” that doesn’t let them express their beliefs openly, according to religious freedom advocates.

They include:

1. Douglas Lee, an Army chaplain who, as president of the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty, is charged with finding people who want to be chaplains and make sure they’re also qualified to serve in the military. Lee said that growing religious hostility within the military is making it harder for him to find potential recruits and for the armed forces to maintain the chaplains it does have. “I know people who get out, officers and chaplains, who’ve said, ‘I can’t serve the way I want to in this environment. People who’ve said, ‘Because of the religious liberty challenges I see, I think I’ll serve somewhere else.'”

2. Michael Berry, senior counsel of the Liberty Institute, a Texas-based nonprofit legal group dedicated to defending and restoring religious liberty across America — in our schools, for our churches, in the military and throughout the public arena. Berry said that recent high-profile cases of military chaplains facing punishment for private counseling sessions that reflected the teachings of their religion could cause devout Americans who are qualified for military service to think twice about joining the military. “People of faith are going to stay away from the military. I can’t tell you how many moms and dads I’ve spoken to who say, ‘My son or daughter wants to join the military, [but] in light of what you’ve described, I’m not sure I want to let them join the military anymore,’ and I don’t blame them. I would have serious reservations about my own kids joining.”

Berry points out that not being able to recruit or retain Christians is very dangerous from a national security standpoint because they could be the military’s next group of leaders, but will never serve because they don’t think they’re welcome. Berry said he thinks the “hostile work environment” that is forcing the most religious persons out of the military is only getting worse, and that while in the past problems were mainly in the Air Force, religious liberty issues have spread throughout all the services. “The problem is getting worse, not better, despite our efforts. There is a culture [of] hostility [toward] religion in the military right now.”

3. Travis Weber, director of the Center for Religious Liberty at the Family Research Council, notes that the hostility is directed not at all religious groups, but against Christians in particular. He said he’s seen a recent uptick and pattern of Christians facing persecution for religious expression.

In effect, it is neither incorrect nor hyperbolic to describe the U.S. military under Obama as anti-Christ.

The military had 2,837 active-duty chaplains as of December 2014, according to numbers provided by the Defense Department. The largest group was the Southern Baptist Convention, with 437 members. More than 200 chaplains are affiliated with the Roman Catholic church, while 26 are Jewish, and just one is Hindu.

DOD spokesman Lt. Cmdr. Nate Christensen insists that “The Department of Defense respects, places a high value on and supports by policy the rights of members of the military services to observe the tenets of their respective religions or to have no religious beliefs. The mission of the chaplain corps is to provide care and the opportunity for service members, their families and other authorized personnel to exercise their constitutional right to the free exercise of religion.” Blah, blah, blah.

The Liberty Institute warns that the abuse of religious freedom within the U.S. military “has intensified under the Obama Administration, and its now reaching crisis level.”

Below are examples of such abuses, in which our service men and women – the very people who fight for our freedoms – are having their First Amendment rights taken away:

Mikey Weinstein

In the above cases, Mikey Weinstein, president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, is the main instigator. Weinstein said that while chaplains can believe whatever their religion teaches, those who think they must act on religious teachings about sex or sexuality have no place in the military. “You can continue to believe that internally, but if you have to act on that, the right thing to do is to get out of the U.S. military, because you have no right to tell a member of the military that they’re inferior because of the way they were born” — which doesn’t make any sense.

Weinstein said he thinks the chaplain corps would work better if chaplains were totally outside the military force structure and didn’t have a military rank because having religious leaders in the military serves as propaganda for Islamic extremist groups who try to paint the U.S. military as religious crusaders — which is a straw-man argument.

H/t FOTM’s MomOfIV


Take the U.S. Citizenship Test!

people are morons

There are 25 questions in all.

To pass the test, you must get at least 15 correct answers.

To take the test, click here, then report back to us on your score!

H/t my sis-in-law Shireen. <3

P.S. I found this a really easy test. Regular readers of FOTM should all ace the test. (I scored 25/25 correct.)


Professors threaten bad grades for saying ‘illegal alien,’ ‘male,’ ‘female’


That’s progressive “higher education” for you.

Campus Reform: Multiple professors at Washington State University have explicitly told students their grades will suffer if they use terms such as “illegal alien,” “male,” and “female,” or if they fail to “defer” to non-white students.

According to the syllabus for Selena Lester Breikss’ “Women & Popular Culture” class, students risk a failing grade if they use any common descriptors that Breikss considers “oppressive and hateful language.”

The punishment for repeatedly using the banned words, Breikss warns, includes “but [is] not limited to removal from the class without attendance or participation points, failure of the assignment, and— in extreme cases— failure for the semester.”

Breikss is not the only WSU faculty member implementing such policies. Much like in Selena Breikss’s classroom, students taking Professor Rebecca Fowler’s “Introduction to Comparative Ethnic Studies” course will see their grades suffer if they use the term “illegal alien” in their assigned writing.


According to her syllabus, students will lose one point every time they use the words “illegal alien” or “illegals” rather than the preferred terms of “‘undocumented’ migrants/immigrants/persons.” Throughout the course, Fowler says, students will “come to recognize how white privilege functions in everyday social structures and institutions.”

In an email to Campus Reform, Fowler complained that “the term ‘illegal alien’ has permeated dominant discourses that circulate in the news to the extent that our society has come to associate ALL unauthorized border crossings with those immigrants originating from countries south of our border (and not with Asian immigrants, for example, many of whom are also in the country without legal documents and make up a considerable portion of undocumented immigrants living in the country).”

“The socio-legal production of migrant illegality works to systematically dehumanize and exploit these brown bodies for their labor,” Fowler continued.

White students in Professor John Streamas’s “Introduction to Multicultural Literature” class, are expected to “defer” to non-white students, among other community guidelines, if they want “to do well in this class.” In the guidelines in his syllabus, Streamas elaborates that he requires students to “reflect” on their grasp of history and social relations “by respecting shy and quiet classmates and by deferring to the experiences of people of color.”

Streamas—who previously generated controversy by calling a student a “white shitbag” and declared that WSU should stand for “White Supremacist University”—also demands that students “understand and consider the rage of people who are victims of systematic injustice.” Later in the syllabus, Streamas goes even further and accuses Glenn Beck of being an “insensitive white.”

Several other WSU professors require their students to “acknowledge that racism, classism, sexism, heterosexism, and other institutionalized forms of oppression exist” or that “we do not live in a post-racial world.”

Ari Cohn, a lawyer with the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, told Campus Reform he considers such requirements to be contradictory, even given the sensitive nature of the courses. “It is notable that one of the syllabus provisions warns: ‘The subject material of this class is sensitive and controversial. Strive to keep an open mind.’ How are students supposed to approach these sensitive and controversial materials at all, let alone to keep an open mind, if they have to fear that a misconstrued statement, or one that unreasonably offends a classmate will lead to a grade reduction or even removal from class?”

Neither Breikss nor Streamas replied to Campus Reform’s request for comment.


Denver may ban Chick-Fil-A due to owner’s stance on traditional marriage

Because Chick-fil-A is being sued every day for discriminatory practices, not.

No hate here...

No hate here…

Huff Po: Chick-fil-A is having some issues getting approval for a new location in Denver, and it’s all because of the restaurant chain’s anti-gay past owner’s personal religious belief.

City council members have halted the approval of a Chick-fil-A location at Denver International Airport as they debate whether or not the franchise should get a seven-year deal, according to the Denver Post. Chick-fil-A was “the second-most sought-after quick service brand at the airport, second to Chipotle,” according to a 2013 survey of airport goers.

But council members voiced concerns over president Dan Cathy’s views on gay marriage. When asked in 2012 whether he believed in the “Biblical definition of a family unit,” president Dan Cathy replied “guilty as charged.”

“All of us become more wise as time goes by. We sincerely care about all people,” Cathy told USA Today last year, after his words ignited a social media firestorm. “I’m going to leave it to politicians and others to discuss social issues.”

Four Denver council members said they want assurances Chick-fil-A’s hiring practices won’t discriminate against people based on their sexual orientation, TV station WTHR noted. Openly gay councilwoman Robin Kniech is concerned that the franchise will be generating “corporate profits used to fund and fuel discrimination.”

Robin Kniech

Robin Kniech

“This discussion — the way it’s unfolding here — hasn’t quite happened before in terms of a contract decision that you all have been asked to make, in all my years here,” David Broadwell, assistant city attorney, said in a council meeting last Tuesday, the Denver Post reported.

The council’s Business Development Committee will consider Chick-fil-A’s proposal again when it meets on Sept. 1.

freedom of speech

h/t Right Scoop


Rutgers: No such thing as ‘free’ speech

no free speech

Campus Reform: There is no such thing as ‘free’ speech,” according to Rutgers University.

The apparent denial of free speech is part of the public university’s effort to combat student bias on campus. The university’s Bias Prevention and Education Committee lists five ways for students to avoid committing “bias incidents.” Tops on the list is the command that students “Think Before [They] Speak.”


To clarify what this means, the university warns students that “[t]here is no such thing as ‘free’ speech.” However, The university’s student code of conduct contains zero references to “free speech” or “freedom of speech.”

“All speech,” the university continues, “has a cost and consequences.”

The university defines “bias acts” as “[v]erbal, written, physical, psychological acts that threaten or harm a person or group on the basis of race, religion, color, sex, age, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, disability, marital status, civil union status, domestic partnership status, atypical heredity or cellular blood trait, military service or veteran status.”

The university encourages students to report “bias incidents”—which can be done anonymously—using an online Incident Report Form. Students can report bias incidents as either a victim or a witness.

The Bias Prevention and Education Committee lists four other ways for students to avoid committing a bias incident. Students are encouraged to “overcome cultural biases” and to join “activities, programs, courses, and practices that promote diversity and social justice.”


The university also encourages students to “[l]ose stereotypes about any group.” There is “no such thing as a ‘positive’ stereotype,” according to the university. “All stereotypes are inherently negative, hurtful, and damaging.”

The Bias Prevention and Education Committee, according to the university, is a “two-tiered body comprised of the Deans of Students Bias Response Team and the Bias Prevention Education Advisory Panel working in concert to MONITOR, PREVENT, REPORT, RESPOND, and RESTORE environments in the aftermath of BIAS INCIDENTS.”

Rutgers professors are encouraged to prevent bias inside the classroom by using “the syllabus to create ground rules with regard to difference and disagreement.” Professors are also encouraged to ask their students “how they feel about provocative material, especially that which references issues of race, sexuality, gender, class, religion or any of the other ‘protected classes.’”

The university did not respond to a voicemail requesting comment.


Northeastern allegedly tells RAs that white men can’t be oppressed


Campus Reform: Resident Assistants (RAs) at Northeastern University are allegedly required to learn that white men can’t be oppressed.

According to a screenshot posted online from the Boston, Mass.-based university’s website, the RA training guide makes the claim that “In order to have the experience of being oppressed one must belong to an oppressed category. Men cannot be oppressed as men, just as whites cannot be oppressed as whites.”

“For a male to experience oppression,” the guide continues, “they would also need to be a person of color, gay, disabled, or in a lower social class.”

The screenshot was originally posted on the image sharing website Imgur, then submitted to the TumblrInAction subreddit of Reddit, with the title “Northeastern University requires its RAs to read and reflect about how white men cannot be oppressed.”

Redditors mocked the posting, which had received several hundred upvotes by time of publication. “Did anyone catch that whole ‘you have to be oppressed in order to suffer oppression’ bit in there? They are actually defining oppression so that it’s not something one experiences, it’s just something you are or are not, and can only experience it if you were born to it. Oppression is an inborn trait now,” one Redditor said. “I almost went to this school, but I didn’t get enough financial aid. It was a blessing in disguise, apparently,” wrote another.

A few posters who claimed to be Northeastern University students bemoaned the posting. “C’mon, Huskies. We can do better than this,” one poster wrote. “[T]hank [G]od I’m moving off campus in the fall,” said another apparent student.

The umbrella of oppression

The umbrella of oppression

The lesson on oppression comes from a section titled “The Umbrella of Oppression,” which includes an image that “illustrates types of discrimination seen in the world today.” The screenshot shows a partial-view of the “Umbrella of Oppression;” the whole image can be found elsewhere on the internet, and listed categories of oppression include classism, sexism, racism, ageism, anti-Semitism, “able-bodyism,” and “heterosexism.”

Heterosexism, according to the university’s “LGBTQA 101 Guide,” includes oppressive acts such as having “M/F checkboxes on forms.”

Similarly, Northeastern encourages students to report “bias incidents”—much like the “bias reports” at Washington University St. Louis—to either the university police department orthe Office of Institutional Diversity and Inclusion.

The university breaks down “all acts of bias and/or hate” into three different tiers. The first tier consists of “physical assault, stalking, or ongoing harassing behavior.” The second deals with “[d]estruction of property directed towards a person or group…[and] verbal harassment based on the protected class status of an individual or a group.” The third level lists “offensive writings” such as those that could be found on a white board or in a bathroom.

In addition to handling “bias incidents,” the Office of Institutional Diversity and Inclusion advertises six different types of training sessions, which are intended for students, faculty, and staff. Among the training sessions offered by the university are workshops titled “Interrupting Microaggressions,” which allows participants to “practice skills to gain confidence as self-advocate,” and “Get informed! Sexual Harassment Awareness,” which is designed to prepare students heading for the workplace to “professionally address possible sexually harassing behaviors from verbal, physical, and visual communication.”

The university also offers a training workshop titled “Safe Zone Training,” which allows students themselves to become a “registered Safe Zone.” *

Northeastern University did not respond to Campus Reform’s request for comment in time for publication.

*From the web site:

What is a “Safe Zone?”
A Safe Zone is a physical space, such as an office, that is marked by a Safe Zone sticker. This space is a place where individuals of all identities are welcome to express themselves in a safe, supportive and welcoming environment. A Safe Zone is also a state of mind. Actions speak louder than words – as such, individuals who identify as a Safe Zone advocate on behalf of the LGBTQA community by speaking out against homophobia and heterosexism.

The goal of the Safe Zone program is to create a campus community that is welcoming and affirming of the LGBTQA Community and their Allies. At the end of a training session, participants will have the opportunity to sign the Safe Zone agreement and join a network of students, faculty, and staff who support the mission of the program.

I prefer this zone:

safe zone