Morality Meltdown

John A. Quayle blueoval at SGI.NET
Fri May 23 05:30:34 MDT 2003


Vol. 19, No. 11
June 2, 2003
<http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2003/06-02-2003/index.htm>Table of Contents
<http://www.thenewamerican.com/focus/religion/index.htm>More on Traditional 
Values


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.

Order This Issue
fffc6d6c.jpg
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 Courts 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 Blackstone, 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.<http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2003/06-02-2003/vo19no11_morality.htm#footnote>*

         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 boffo 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 exposé 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's 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 raunchiest 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 America'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's 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 
through 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 Americans 
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 codes, 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 composed of the likes of Prof. Glennon, no doubt - must ask 
are: "What 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's 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 spokesman 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's 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.

----------
In our next issue: Not everyone in Hollywood and the entertainment industry 
is a heedless hedonist. We will be reporting on the surprising number of 
recording and movie celebrities taking forthright, public stands for 
chastity, marriage, the right to life, and Christianity.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://kalos.csdco.com/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20030523/8febb97b/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: fffc6d6c.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 24118 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://kalos.csdco.com/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20030523/8febb97b/attachment.jpg 
-------------- next part --------------

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.483 / Virus Database: 279 - Release Date: 5/19/2003


More information about the Rushtalk mailing list