Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis is Sudden Symbol of Recalcitrant Resistance to Depraved Leftist Homosexual Agenda

I'm actually not backing this lady, since she's a government employee. The Supremes ruled in favor of a right to homosexual marriage. I don't like it, but that's the law. She should take her opposition campaign to the private realm. Folks expect to get the marriage licenses in the state, and rightly so.

At the Lexington Herald-Leader, "Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis, once a local fixture, is suddenly a national symbol."

And at the Louisville Courier-Journal, "Kim Davis cites God, crowd jeers gay couple," and "Rowan clerk Kim Davis loses Supreme Court fight."

Planned Parenthood and the Price of Aborted Baby Parts

From Charles Krauthammer, at the Washington Post, "The price of fetal parts":

“Thank you, Planned Parenthood. God bless you.”

— Barack Obama, address to Planned Parenthood, April 26, 2013

Planned Parenthood’s reaction to the release of a clandestinely recorded conversation about the sale of fetal body parts was highly revealing. After protesting that it did nothing illegal, it apologized for the “tone” of one of its senior directors.

Her remarks lacked compassion, admitted Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards. As if Dr. Deborah Nucatola’s cold and casual discussion over salad and wine of how the fetal body can be crushed with forceps in a way that leaves valuable organs intact for sale is some kind of personal idiosyncrasy. On the contrary, it’s precisely the kind of psychic numbing that occurs when dealing daily with industrial scale destruction of the growing, thriving, recognizably human fetus.

This was again demonstrated by the release this week of a second video showing another official sporting that same tone, casual and even jocular, while haggling over the price of an embryonic liver. “If it’s still low, then we can bump it up,” she joked, “I want a Lamborghini.”

Abortion critics have long warned that the problem is not only the obvious — what abortion does to the fetus — but also what it does to us. It’s the same kind of desensitization that has occurred in the Netherlands with another mass exercise in life termination: assisted suicide. It began as a way to prevent the suffering of the terminally ill. It has now become so widespread and wanton that one-fifth of all Dutch assisted-suicide patients are euthanized without their explicit consent.

The Planned Parenthood revelations will have an effect. Perhaps not on government funding, given the Democratic Party’s unwavering support and the president wishing it divine guidance. Planned Parenthood might escape legal jeopardy as well, given the loophole in the law banning the sale of fetal parts that permits compensation for expenses (shipping and handling, as it were).

But these revelations will have an effect on public perceptions. Just as ultrasound altered feelings about abortion by showing the image, the movement, the vibrant living-ness of the developing infant in utero, so too, I suspect, will these Planned Parenthood revelations, by throwing open the door to the backroom of the clinic where that being is destroyed.

It’s an ugly scene. The issue is less the sale of body parts than how they are obtained. The nightmare for abortion advocates is a spreading consciousness of how exactly a healthy fetus is turned into a mass of marketable organs, how, in the words of a senior Planned Parenthood official, one might use “a less crunchy technique” — crush the head, spare the organs — “to get more whole specimens.”

The effect on the public is a two-step change in sensibilities. First, when ultrasound reveals how human the living fetus appears. Next, when people learn, as in these inadvertent admissions, what killing the fetus involves.

Remember. The advent of ultrasound has coincided with a remarkable phenomenon: Of all the major social issues, abortion is the only one that has not moved toward increasing liberalization. While the legalization of drugs, the redefinition of marriage and other assertions of individual autonomy have advanced, some with astonishing rapidity, abortion attitudes have remained largely static. The country remains evenly split...

Well, public support for homosexual "marriage" and licentiousness has already tanked since the Obergefell decision, and folks are having second thoughts about the legalization of marijuana. What's going to take is a change in leadership at the very top. We know that the left is moving into its Thermidorean phase. Now's the time to crush the death-worshiping regressives while their down.

Keep reading.

Boy Scouts of America to Lift Ban on Homosexual Adults

Hey, gotta go with the flow, I guess.

At ABC 10 News, San Diego, "Boy Scouts board ends ban on gay scout leaders."

Also at CNN, "Jon Langbert, a former Boy Scout leader who is gay, says that the lifted ban on gay adult leaders does not go far enough."

Doesn't go far enough? You'll notice that the goal isn't so much to allow gays to participate in the Boy Scouts, but to once again banish altogether the role of religion out of American life, public and private.

This whole turn is horrendous. See, "The Same-Sex Marriage Bait-and-Switch."

Poll Shows Support for Homosexual Marriage Tanking After Supreme Court's Obergefell Ruling

This is counterintuitive.

You'd think a threshold's been crossed, and public acceptance of homosexual nuptials would increase.

But no. What's happening is the over-the-top football-spiking of the left's depraved homos is simply turning people off. Indeed, I've been predicting that support for homosexual marriage would decline as the homosexual ayatollahs, emboldened by judicial fiat, started to violently impose their hateful agenda on the rest of America. Combine that with the numerous examples of threats to religious liberty, and it's clear that same-sex licentiousness will continue to be a hot-button issue in politics and elections going forward.

At USA Today, "Poll shows slight dip in gay marriage support since Supreme Court ruling":

NEW YORK (AP) — The Supreme Court's ruling last month legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide has left Americans sharply divided, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll that suggests support for gay unions may be down slightly from earlier this year.

The poll also found a near-even split over whether local officials with religious objections should be required to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, with 47 percent saying that should be the case and 49 percent say they should be exempt.

Overall, if there's a conflict, a majority of those questioned think religious liberties should win out over gay rights, according to the poll. While 39 percent said it's more important for the government to protect gay rights, 56 percent said protection of religious liberties should take precedence.

The poll was conducted July 9 to July 13, less than three weeks after the Supreme Court ruled states cannot ban same-sex marriage.

According to the poll, 42 percent support same-sex marriage and 40 percent oppose it. The percentage saying they favor legal same-sex marriage in their state was down slightly from the 48 percent who said so in an April poll. In January, 44 percent were in favor.

Asked specifically about the Supreme Court ruling, 39 percent said they approve and 41 percent said they disapprove.

"What the Supreme Court did is jeopardize our religious freedoms," said Michael Boehm, 61, an industrial controls engineer from the Detroit area who describes himself as a conservative-leaning independent.

"You're going to see a conflict between civil law and people who want to live their lives according to their faiths," Boehm said...

Only 42 percent support homosexual marriage? That's not a "slight decline." That's an almost 20 percent drop off from the widely touted Gallup poll that had support for homo unions at 60 percent.

Hmm, you think the Supreme Court stepped in and derailed a political contest raging across the country at the state level? No wonder conservative support for the Court is collapsing.

Hat Tip: The Daily Signal, "Poll: 59% Believe Businesses Should Be Able to Decline Gay Weddings."

Lesbian Margie Winters Fired from Waldron Mercy Academy for Homosexual Marriage

At the video, "presumably there are parents who are in favor of the school's decision." Yes, presumably. Would have been nice had this idiot reporter tracked a few of them down, rather than rely on this far-left radical Nancy Houston to speak for "the community." (Houston's also interviewed at MyFox 29 Philadelphia.)

What a joke. You can't even be Catholic in this country any more. Sad.

At the Philadelphia Inquirer, "Lesbian educator dismissed by Catholic school":

A RELIGIOUS-EDUCATION director at a Montgomery County Catholic school has been dismissed because, parents say, she is lesbian wedded to a woman.

Many parents have voiced support for the educator, Margie Winters, director of religious education and outreach, calling her "inspirational" and "dedicated." Now they're directing their ire not at the school and its sponsor, the Sisters of Mercy, but at the Archdiocese of Philadelphia and Archbishop Charles Chaput.

"It's time to get the attention of the Archdiocese and the Catholic hierarchy and let them know this is illegal," said Katie Culver, who has three children at the school.

Parents and alumni will meet tonight to discuss the matter and "to unify in support of Margie," Culver said.

Waldron Mercy's principal, Nell Stetser, addressed Winters' dismissal in a letter Friday to parents.

"[O]ur school recognizes the authority of the Archbishop of Philadelphia, especially in the teaching of religion, because we call ourselves Catholic," she wrote.

Despite her "amazing contributions" to the school in Merion Station, the school opted not to renew Winters' contract, Stetser wrote.

"Margie certainly has enriched the lives of everyone in the WMA family . . . however, my duty is to protect our school's future," Stetser wrote.

"In the Mercy spirit, many of us accept life choices that contradict current Church teachings, but to continue as a Catholic school Waldron Mercy must comply with those teachings," she wrote.

Some parents are not buying it.

"It's not for any other reason but the fact that she is a homosexual," said Anthony Archievala, whose two daughters attend Waldron Mercy. "We were shocked because she'd been there for so many years."

A parent wrote to school officials and the Archdiocese suggesting that Winters use the "Theology of the Body," a series of addresses by Pope John Paul II, in the school curriculum, and Winters said no, Culver said.

Efforts yesterday to reach the parent were unsuccessful.

Archdiocese spokesman Ken Gavin released a statement denying that the church was involved in Winters' ouster.

"Waldron is a private Catholic school and it is not in any way under the administrative purview of the Archdiocese," he said. "As such, personnel decisions at that school are made locally without oversight from the Archdiocese."

Winters began to work for the school in August 2007, according to her LinkedIn page. She did not respond to requests for comment.

Winters' old job is already listed under employment opportunities on Waldron Mercy's website...

Also at Truth Revolt, "Philly Catholic School Facing Severe Legal Punishment After Firing Lesbian Teacher."

PREVIOUSLY: "The Coming Era of Civil Disobedience."

BuzzFeed's Struggles on Homosexual Marriage

From Mollie Hemingway, at the Federalist, "BuzzFeed’s Journalistic Struggles on Same-Sex Marriage, In GIFs."

@MZHemingway I don't know most people's faith/personal views on much. Definitely ppl who disagree on the constitutional q.

— Ben Smith (@BuzzFeedBen) June 30, 2015

The Next Culture War

From David Brooks, at the New York Times.

Read at the link for Brooks' discussion on the new round of the culture wars that's been unleashed with the Obergefell decision. Brooks suggests that it may be time to move past the current battles, which conservatives have lost:

Consider a different culture war, one just as central to your faith and far more powerful in its persuasive witness.

We live in a society plagued by formlessness and radical flux, in which bonds, social structures and commitments are strained and frayed. Millions of kids live in stressed and fluid living arrangements. Many communities have suffered a loss of social capital. Many young people grow up in a sexual and social environment rendered barbaric because there are no common norms. Many adults hunger for meaning and goodness, but lack a spiritual vocabulary to think things through.

Social conservatives could be the people who help reweave the sinews of society. They already subscribe to a faith built on selfless love. They can serve as examples of commitment. They are equipped with a vocabulary to distinguish right from wrong, what dignifies and what demeans. They already, but in private, tithe to the poor and nurture the lonely.

The defining face of social conservatism could be this: Those are the people who go into underprivileged areas and form organizations to help nurture stable families. Those are the people who build community institutions in places where they are sparse. Those are the people who can help us think about how economic joblessness and spiritual poverty reinforce each other. Those are the people who converse with us about the transcendent in everyday life.

This culture war is more Albert Schweitzer and Dorothy Day than Jerry Falwell and Franklin Graham; more Salvation Army than Moral Majority. It’s doing purposefully in public what social conservatives already do in private.

I don’t expect social conservatives to change their positions on sex, and of course fights about the definition of marriage are meant as efforts to reweave society. But the sexual revolution will not be undone anytime soon. The more practical struggle is to repair a society rendered atomized, unforgiving and inhospitable. Social conservatives are well equipped to repair this fabric, and to serve as messengers of love, dignity, commitment, communion and grace.

More at Memeorandum, especially Rod Dreher, at AmCon, "David Brooks on ‘The Next Culture War’," and Vox Day, at Vox Populi, "They are the SAME war."

I thinks folks on the right should just step back, take a breather on the culture wars and start prioritizing a national security agenda for election 2016. Economics and national security should be the big issues, with immigration a key plank on the homeland side of security. Give homosexual marriage a rest --- at least for now.

Celebrate Hate? Homosexual Revelers Use Brazil Pride Festivities to Blaspheme Jesus Christ

From earlier this month.

At the Conservative Post, "Gay Pride Participants Mock Jesus and the Bible in a Disturbing Way."

And from Amy Proctor, on Facebook.

Gay Pride Festivities in Brazil. I've seen WAY worse in San Francisco.

I notice they're not targeting Buddha or Mohammed.... why? Because this movement is an anti-Christ movement and no Christian can support it in any way.

Choose you this day whom you will serve... but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

Joshua 24:15- "But if it seem evil to you to serve the Lord, you have your choice: choose this day that which pleaseth you, whom you would rather serve, whether the gods which your fathers served in Mesopotamia, or the gods of the Amorrhites, in whose land you dwell: but as for me and my house we will serve the Lord."

No doubt similar blasphemy was taking place all across the U.S. this weekend. For example, at Twitchy, "#LoveWins? Bronx priest reports getting spit on after today's gay pride parade in NYC," and Gateway Pundit, "Catholic Priest Spit On at Bronx Gay Pride Parade."

BONUS: At Time, "Facebook Has a Super Easy Way to Let You Celebrate Gay Pride," and "Here's how to add a rainbow filter to your Facebook photo in honor of the gay marriage ruling."

Homosexual Marriage is Not a Constitutional Right

It is now.

It wasn't seven years ago when California voters banned it at the ballot box, in Proposition 8. The Courts overturned the will of the voters, here and elsewhere. As I wrote at the time, "Gay Marriage is Not a Civil Right."

This editorial, at IBD and seen on Twitter, is from 2013, "Forget Gay Marriage: What About The Decline of Marriage?"

The constitutional right to homosexual marriage won't strengthen the institution of marriage. In fact, it will have the opposite effect, as all manner of sexual relationships will now be legitimized and America will continue to slide down the slippery slope.

(IBD) Homosexual Marriage Is NOT A Constitutional Right - http://t.co/jDE1TWavQJ - #PJNET - #IBDEditorials - pic.twitter.com/HiX75q5Lie

— Daniel John Sobieski (@gerfingerpoken) June 27, 2015

Homosexual Marriage Symposia

I'm seeing a number of conservative roundups on homosexual marriage.

For example, at National Review, "The Supreme Court Has Legalized Same-Sex Marriage: Now What?"

Also at the Federalist, "Gay Marriage Is Here – Now What?", and First Things, "After Obergefell: A First Things Symposium."

How Conservatives Move Forward After Obergefell v. Hodges

From JPod, at Commentary, "Three Ways Conservatives Can Move Forward After Last Week."

Personally, I think Republicans should downplay homosexual marriage, as I've indicated. Clearly, with today's ruling on the death penalty, all is not lost in the culture wars, not the death penalty and certainly not abortion, which death-loving Democrats avoid talking about at all costs.

How Does Homosexual Ruling Affect 2016 GOP Presidential Field?

More on the political fallout of the left's culture war victory.

From David Lauter and Mark Barabak, at the Los Angeles Times, "A GOP conundrum: How does a 2016 candidate play the same-sex marriage ruling?":

Within minutes of the Supreme Court's decision declaring a constitutional right for same-sex couples to marry, President Obama joined the celebration, calling one of the gay plaintiffs to congratulate him on live television, then going to the Rose Garden to hail Friday's ruling as a moment when "slow, steady effort is rewarded with justice that arrives like a thunderbolt."

Almost simultaneously, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, one of the leading Republicans in the race to succeed Obama, denounced the decision as a "grave mistake" and called for a constitutional amendment to reverse it. Another GOP hopeful, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, said the high court had "crossed from the realm of activism into the arena of oligarchy," and called for a constitutional amendment to allow voters to remove Supreme Court justices from office.

By contrast, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, also seeking the Republican nomination, stepped softly, saying only that he thought "the Supreme Court should have allowed the states to make this decision." GOP candidate Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida said: "While I disagree with this decision, we live in a republic and must abide by the law."

The widely different approaches highlighted how gay rights — same-sex marriage, in particular — continue to divide and shape American politics.

Republicans running for president face a choice in responding to the court's ruling. They could try to use the strong emotions same-sex marriages evoke as a way to mobilize conservative voters in primaries, but potentially at the cost of undermining their campaigns in next year's general election. Or they could seize on the finality of a Supreme Court ruling as a way of avoiding an issue on which their party is out of step with the majority of voters, but at the risk of alienating conservatives who see the court decision as a violation of deeply held religious principles.

How they choose to navigate the issue will help determine whether the vast majority of the country quickly accepts the court's ruling, as happened with the decision to wipe out laws against interracial marriage nearly half a century ago, or whether it will remain divisive for years to come...

More.

And see my earlier comments on this, from just a few minutes ago, "As Left Wins Culture Battles, Republicans Have Chance to Pivot for 2016."

As Left Wins Culture Battles, Republicans Have Chance to Pivot for 2016

Meh. I'm skeptical of this argument.

And I'm skeptical because the left makes everything about culture. Economics is about culture. About "flyover country" and the "47 percent."

2016 will be about race and especially gender, if Hillary's the nominee, which it'll be surprising if she not.

From Jonathan Martin, at the New York Times, "As Left Wins Culture Battles, G.O.P. Gains Opportunity to Pivot for 2016":

WASHINGTON — A cascade of events suggests that 2015 could be remembered as a Liberal Spring: the moment when deeply divisive and consuming questions of race, sexuality and broadened access to health care were settled in quick succession, and social tolerance was cemented as a cornerstone of American public life.

Yet what appears, in headlines and celebrations across the country, to represent an unalloyed victory for Democrats, in which lawmakers and judges alike seemed to give in to the leftward shift of public opinion, may contain an opening for the Republican Party to move beyond losing battles and seemingly lost causes.

Conservatives have, in short order, endured a series of setbacks on ideas that, for some on the right, are definitional: that marriage is between a man and a woman, that Southern heritage and its symbols are to be unambivalently revered and that the federal government should play a limited role in the lives of Americans.

Remarkably, some of these verities have been challenged not by liberals but by figures from the right.

The past week and the month that preceded it have been nothing short of a rout in the culture wars. Bruce Jenner, the famed Olympian, became Caitlyn Jenner in the most prominent moment yet for transgender people. The killings of nine black churchgoers in Charleston, S.C., at once rendered the Confederate battle flag unsuitable for government-sanctioned display. And Friday’s legalization of same-sex marriage nationwide elevated a community that had been consigned to the shadows for centuries of American life.

But even as conservatives appear under siege, some Republicans predict that this moment will be remembered as an effective wiping of the slate before the nation begins focusing in earnest on the presidential race.

As important as some of these issues may be to the most conservative elements of the party’s base and in the primaries ahead, few Republican leaders want to contest the 2016 elections on social or cultural grounds, where polls suggest that they are sharply out of step with the American public.

“Every once in a while, we bring down the curtain on the politics of a prior era,” said David Frum, the conservative writer. “The stage is now cleared for the next generation of issues. And Republicans can say, ‘Whether you’re gay, black or a recent migrant to our country, we are going to welcome you as a fully cherished member of our coalition.’ ”

The critical question is whether the Republican Party will embrace such a message in order to seize what many party officials see as an opening to turn the election toward economic and national security issues.

It will not happen easily: Every major Republican presidential candidate criticized the Supreme Court’s ruling on Friday affirming same-sex marriage as the law of the land.

Of course, many of the Republicans running for president are keen to move on from the culture wars, but others, like Mike Huckabee and Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, are already seizing on matters like same-sex marriage and what they call judicial overreach to distinguish themselves in a crowded primary field. And the conservative activists and interest groups that play an important role in the primary will not let any of the candidates simply move on.

“Our candidates running in a primary are put in a little bit of a box by the events of this week, but at the same time, it does change the landscape for the general election, which is a blessing,” said Carl Forti, a Republican strategist who has worked on presidential races. “I’m glad I’m not on a campaign and don’t have to advise my candidate on how to navigate those three issues this week, because the answers for the primary and the general are radically different.”

Privately, some of the strategists advising Republican hopefuls believe the last week has been nothing short of a gift from above — a great unburdening on issues of race and sexuality, and on health care a disaster averted. Rhetorical opposition to the Affordable Care Act will still be de rigueur in the primaries, but litigating the issue in theory is wholly different from doing so with more than six million people deprived of their health insurance.

Collectively, this optimistic thinking would have it, June will go down as the month that dulled some of the wedge issues Democrats were hoping to wield next year...

That's the other thing: Republicans need to realize they've been beaten on homosexual marriage and back off for awhile. There'll be time to revisit when the harshly negative social effects start to bleed through. Meanwhile, taxes, economic growth, immigration, and foreign policy remain well within the GOP's wheelhouse, and they should press full steam ahead. The Dems can be beat in 2016, easily. But Republicans need to get real about all the recent changes and focus on their strengths, which are plenty.

Keep reading, in any case.

President Obama Calls Jim Obergefell, Plaintiff in Depraved Homosexual Marriage Ruling (VIDEO)

At CNN:

Homosexual Marriage Ruling Starts New Religious Freedom War

At IBD, "Same-Sex Marriage Ruling Starts New Religious Freedom War":

#SupremeCourt Gay Marriage Ruling Will Harm #ReligiousFreedom, Marginalize Biblical Worldview: http://t.co/c6aRo5CIT7 pic.twitter.com/0L7mzKKwBP

— The Christian Post (@ChristianPost) June 26, 2015

Observant Christians — and adherents of other faiths — are reeling from the Supreme Court's declaration of a constitutional right to same-sex marriage and preparing for an unprecedented struggle for their right to express their beliefs and live their lives accordingly, as new battles will now be waged unless and until a future Supreme Court reverses course.

The Constitution says nothing about marriage or abortion. Yet in 1973 the Supreme Court declared a constitutional right to abortion, resulting in decades of relentless political and legal conflicts.

Now the Court has held that the Constitution likewise forbids the 50 states from defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. But many people of faith disagree, and the First Amendment promises that they have the right to do so. Devout Christians are already enmeshed in legal battles over this issue.

Navy chaplain Wes Modder, sportscaster Craig James and others have lost jobs or are losing their jobs because they hold Christian beliefs on sex and marriage.

Business owners face more than losing their businesses, as Washington florist Barronelle Stutzman could lose her home and life's savings, and Colorado baker Jack Phillips risks jail time if he continues refusing to bake cakes celebrating gay marriage. There are others, and the list grows monthly.

Keep reading.

Stonewall Homosexuals Celebrate Supreme Court Same-Sex Marriage Ruling

Well, homosexual rainbows are breaking out all over.

At CBS News New York:

#BlackLivesMatter Activists Whine That Homosexual Marriage Overshadows Their Movement

When all is said and done, homosexuals are higher up the hierarchy of the oppressed.

At Twitchy, "Does the #BlackLivesMatter movement have a problem with today’s focus on gay marriage? Sure looks like it!"

They only legalized gay marriage to get everyone off track about #BlackLivesMatter

— BabyBoy ⛽️ (@DavoneTurner) June 26, 2015

Yes. Only.

Team U.S.A. Star Alex Morgan Comes Out for Homosexual Marriage

Women's World Cup quarterfinals play is on right now.

Meanwhile, Alex Morgan tweeted her support for the Supreme Court's homosexual marriage ruling:

Finally. A big step in the right direction for our country! https://t.co/uDS6ltqpcR

— Alex Morgan (@alexmorgan13) June 26, 2015

She's also got some coverage at Sports Illustrated today, plus flashback to her body paint in 2012:

Let's hear it for @alexmorgan13 and the @ussoccer_wnt team! http://t.co/yRK3Dx1eJ2 pic.twitter.com/y4WX02WW93

— SI Swimsuit (@SI_Swimsuit) June 26, 2015

Elizabeth Warren Wears Feather Boa to Celebrate Homosexual Marriage Ruling in Massachusetts

Well, it's a "boa" at the tweet, but c'mon. Is there any other kind?

From Jacklyn Friedman:

Don’t know if you can see her here, but Senator Warren is wearing a boa at the State House right now. pic.twitter.com/uFClUBBoRk

— Jaclyn Friedman (@jaclynf) June 26, 2015

Franklin Graham: Prepare for Persecution of Christians After Homosexual Marriage Ruling (VIDEO)

Yep.

And S.E. Cupp discounts this.

Franklin Graham: "Our nation has a spiritual problem."

Bingo: