American Leadership Fund

Comments Off

American Leadership FundThe American Leadership Fund supports conservative causes and candidates that believe in limited government, fiscal restraint and principled leadership.

We are engaging the grassroots through media messaging heard on The Cherilyn Eagar Radio Show, where we are courageously defending the social – moral issues, whose abandonment is largely responsible for the bloated entitlements and causing unsustainable debt.  We are in search of new American leaders.

We will fight to keep the the Republican Platform Republican.  We are Pro-Life, Pro-Marriage, Pro-Religious Liberty, Pro-State Sovereignty, Pro-2nd Amendment, Pro-Border Security, pro-Free Enterprise, and above all, Pro-US Constitution.   Let us fight for these principles together in our towns, cities, states, in Congress and in the Courts.

You can make a difference.

We welcome your support. To volunteer, fill out this survey.

DonateBoxBlessings,

Cherilyn Eagar signature

 

Cherilyn Eagar, President

The American Leadership Fund supports conservative causes and candidates that believe in limited government, fiscal restraint and principled leadership. We are engaging the grassroots through media messaging heard on The Cherilyn Eagar Radio Show, where we are courageously defending the social – moral issues, whose abandonment is largely responsible for the bloated entitlements and causing […]

Read More

34,000 congregations split from Presbyterian Church and Russell Moore Explains Indiana’s Religious Liberty Law

0 No Comments

There’s a lot of confusion about Indiana’s Governor Mike Pence’s signing of the Religious Freedom and Restoration Act recently. LGBT activists are up in arms. Left-leaning Fortune 100 corporations are threatening to leave the state or boycott it, claiming a return to Jim Crow laws.

Then comes Russell Moore, the Alabama Supreme Court Justice that thumbed his nose at the circuit court when it told him the state had to legalize gay marriage. His response was a simple just say “No.”

Now Moore’s blog post clarifies exactly what the RFRA does and does not do. This is one judge that understands his role and Constitutional law. It’s short and worth reading and helps cut through all the hyperbole and lies of the Left.

Here’s the text of the Indiana law. Short and simple. Every state should have one.

Question: Should the religious baker or florist – or the Urologist (which my deceased father was), who is asked to be on the team of a transgender surgery, or the Pro-Life doctor be protected from providing services that violate that individual’s religious doctrines and beliefs? Or does one’s religious belief that holds to biblical definitions of homosexuality and gay marriage constitute racism and bigotry?

Utah, one of the most religious and conservative states in the union has left that an open-ended question and due to the legislature’s passage of a very weak bill that only protects religious institutions and government officials, We the People are left vulnerable to persecution in the form of lawsuits, fines and penalties. Shame on them. Utah is an embarrassment to the rest of the nation for taking a “live and let live” approach to what many of its citizens consider to be a sin, and definitely a sin against innocent children being harmed.

It is time every state awakened to the awful state they are in and act to protect vulnerable children who are and will continue to be harmed.

Blessings to this brave woman who is speaking out in this heart-wrenching post about the selfish motives of the LGBT movement and her experience growing up in a lesbian home.

34,000 Black Congregations Break from Presbyterian Church USA

While this debate for religious liberty in Indiana takes front and center nationally, very little is being said about the 34,000 African-American congregations affiliated with the Presbyterian Church which represent 15 denominations comprising 15.5 million African-Americans that have just split because they oppose the church’s decision to incorporate gay marriage into its canon of doctrine. (Folks, that’s about the size of the ENTIRE Mormon Church worldwide!) Here is the article that provides the details.

I’d like to take this opportunity to applaud both Justice Russell Moore and the African-American pastors and community for taking a bold stance for truth and righteousness’ sake.

If only more religious faiths would join them.

So while the cultural wars continue, we are working hard to bring you the red glaring truth that is being buried in mainstream media. We aired our final radio program on AM 1430 KLO last Saturday with thanks to that station and in anticipation of moving to another station, which we will be announcing soon.

We need your help today in the final hours of this reporting period, which ends March 31, 2015 at midnight. Any amount is so appreciated. $25, $50, $100 or more…

To donate, simply text “ALF” to the number 313131 or click on the donate button above or send in your contribution to:

American Leadership Fund
999 Murray Holladay Road, Suite 202
Salt Lake City, UT 84117

There’s a lot of confusion about Indiana’s Governor Mike Pence’s signing of the Religious Freedom and Restoration Act recently. LGBT activists are up in arms. Left-leaning Fortune 100 corporations are threatening to leave the state or boycott it, claiming a return to Jim Crow laws. Then comes Russell Moore, the Alabama Supreme Court Justice that […]

Read More

Your Cell Phone Funds Abortion and Other Liberal Causes – What You Can Do About It

0 No Comments

You may not be aware that some of the largest corporate donors to liberal causes are the mobile phone companies. Between them AT&T and Verizon have provided almost $70 million to liberal politicians.

This money goes to everyone from Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to Elizabeth Warren right on down to liberals at the state and local level who are making decisions that impact you on a daily basis.

This is so pervasive that AT&T has sponsored more than 9,000 and Verizon more than 4,000 winning liberal candidates. (Sprint, T-Mobile and other mobile operators are not quite as bad, but still provide significant contributions to liberals every election cycle).

EOS-Logo-MLearning this made me so upset, that I went in search of a conservative answer, and I found one. It’s called Eos Mobile. It was founded by conservative activists as an alternative to the liberal agenda of your current phone company.

Eos Mobile has fantastic service across the country with a network of high speed data and voice. It also has prices that are 10-15% lower than Verizon and AT&T for basically the same service.

What attracted me to Eos Mobile is its promise to never give any contributions to liberals. In addition, they give as much as 3% of every dollar you spend to conservative causes.

I reached out to their CEO and he arranged for a special offer to American Leadership Fund members. It includes a free iPhone 5C and waives the activation fees for smart phones. The American Leadership Fund special includes a healthy 2.5 GB of data per device and it has family plans that pool all the data and include unlimited minutes and texts. This special offer also includes other devices and plans that don’t include data.

Best of all, if you identify as a supporter of the American Leadership Fund Eos has agreed to provide us with up to 3% of every bill to continue the work we are pursuing to help conservatives run and win elections.

If everyone on our list would switch to Eos, we would accomplish two important things.

1. We would stop unknowingly providing aid and comfort to the liberals through our phone bill
2. We would be supporting a conservative company and raising significant funds for American Leadership Fund.

I have switched my phones over to Eos, and I am hopeful that each of you will take the time to do so as well. I know some of you won’t do this, but if everyone on our list joined us at Eos Mobile, our combined phone bills would generate almost $20 million for the American Leadership Fund SuperPAC for 2016. With those funds we could help conservative candidates win the close races and change the trajectory of our country.

As always, I appreciate your continued support, but here is an opportunity to stop giving to liberals and to start supporting conservatives with a bill you pay every month. To sign up for this awesome special offer, visit the Eos website and call Eos Mobile today at 877-367-7524 and mention “American Leadership Fund.”

You may not be aware that some of the largest corporate donors to liberal causes are the mobile phone companies. Between them AT&T and Verizon have provided almost $70 million to liberal politicians. This money goes to everyone from Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to Elizabeth Warren right on down to liberals at the state […]

Read More

Why High Stakes Testing Should Be STOPPED – Out of the Mouth of a Nine Year Old

0 No Comments

This video of a nine year old girl who delivered a speech at a school board meeting on March 17, 2015 is hysterical – but so true.  It’s worth the watch.  Then after you have had a good chuckle at her chutzpah, consider her words seriously.

This is what Florida governor Jeb Bush has promoted. He fully supports the agenda of common core reforms and the need for federal control and behavioral testing. The first step to getting rid of “high stakes” testing is to ask Washington DC to stick to its enumerated powers, which does NOT include education.  It’s well past time to restore Reagan’s dream to “dismantle” the Department of Education.  Until that happens, states will continue to be held hostage to the carrot-and-stick tactics of the federal government.  If you take a dime of its funding, you are then bound by its rules.

All across the nation – Republican and Democratic governors cave in to the federal dollars that flow. Again, Utah is at the forefront of this agenda. Governor Gary Herbert is the vice chairman of the National Governor’s Association, one of the key lobbyist organizations that has played a hand in funding and supporting common core reforms.

In state after state these reforms have been railroaded through the legislatures. All roads lead to the United Nations, where common core and No Child Left Behind and the concept of “Education for All” had its origins. This is a global reform movement to align all schools with social justice norms promoting redistribution and social equity at the expense of religious and individual liberty, and dependence on government as the giver of all charity. To know that these tests are primarily developed by the American Institutes of Research, a behavioral testing-survey company, is troubling to many parents who object to the invasion of their privacy and the undermining of their family values.

We need your help to inform more people. Please do two things today: 1) pass this message along and 2) donate. We hope to continue to share news as it breaks on a variety of issues, education and the indoctrination of our children with secular humanistic ideas is one of the areas of concern. Simply text “ALF” to the number 313131. Or click on the donate button above.

This video of a nine year old girl who delivered a speech at a school board meeting on March 17, 2015 is hysterical – but so true.  It’s worth the watch.  Then after you have had a good chuckle at her chutzpah, consider her words seriously. This is what Florida governor Jeb Bush has promoted. […]

Read More

Personal Loss and the Preservation of Family, Faith, Freedom

0 No Comments

It’s the end of another Sunday, that day of rest for those of us that honor the Sabbath on this day.  As the evening draws around, I wanted to share some personal thoughts. We are engaged in the cause of preserving our children’s future, rooted in the family – the foundation of that free society – and fundamentally religious liberty.

It was such sobering and tragic news to learn of the fire that killed seven children in an Orthodox Jewish Sabbath fire on Saturday, March 21, 2015.  As a mother of five myself, I cannot fathom the overwhelming grief the surviving father must feel, now watching his wife and only remaining child – a 14 year old daughter – suffer in critical condition in the hospital from extensive burns.

First, the irony.  Orthodox Jewish religious tradition does not permit flames for cooking on the Sabbath.  Meanwhile, ISIS violence – as evidenced in videos of beheading and burning “infidels” alive in the Middle East, continued threats of terrorist attacks in the region – puts the cause of freedom into perspective in light of this faithful family’s loss.

Second, nothing is as precious as the life of a child, preservation of family and the bond they create through religious faith.  These children have lost their physical lives and the parents and remaining child will be emotionally scarred, but they have not lost their souls – not a single one of those seven children.  They were “pure” in the eyes of G-d as their father Gabriel Sassoon said.  Their faith will sustain this family.  I have utmost respect for my Orthodox Jewish friends and their religious traditions.  My prayers are with this family and a community in mourning.

That is a lesson for all of us.

We are surrounded by so much suffering, but our collective faith, whether Jew or Christian, tells us there is still a G-d and that He is in charge, that there is more beyond this life, and that we will have eternal peace if we are true to our faith. Our Divine Maker knows all, and there is a purpose to everything under heaven.

I thought it would be appropriate to quote from the translated Jewish bible Kohelet Chapter 3, sentiments shared by Christian and Jew alike:

Everything has an appointed season, and there is a time for every matter under the heaven. אלַכֹּל זְמָן וְעֵת לְכָל חֵפֶץ תַּחַת הַשָּׁמָיִם:
2A time to give birth and a time to die; a time to plant and a time to uproot that which is planted. בעֵת לָלֶדֶת וְעֵת לָמוּת עֵת לָטַעַת וְעֵת לַעֲקוֹר נָטוּעַ:
3A time to kill and a time to heal; a time to break and a time to build. געֵת לַהֲרוֹג וְעֵת לִרְפּוֹא עֵת לִפְרוֹץ וְעֵת לִבְנוֹת:
4A time to weep and a time to laugh; a time of wailing and a time of dancing. דעֵת לִבְכּוֹת וְעֵת לִשְׂחוֹק עֵת סְפוֹד וְעֵת רְקוֹד:
5A time to cast stones and a time to gather stones; a time to embrace and a time to refrain from embracing. העֵת לְהַשְׁלִיךְ אֲבָנִים וְעֵת כְּנוֹס אֲבָנִים עֵת לַחֲבוֹק וְעֵת לִרְחֹק מֵחַבֵּק:
6A time to seek and a time to lose; a time to keep and a time to cast away. ועֵת לְבַקֵּשׁ וְעֵת לְאַבֵּד עֵת לִשְׁמוֹר וְעֵת לְהַשְׁלִיךְ:
7A time to rend and a time to sew; a time to be silent and a time to speak. זעֵת לִקְרוֹעַ וְעֵת לִתְפּוֹר עֵת לַחֲשׁוֹת וְעֵת לְדַבֵּר:
8A time to love and a time to hate; a time for war and a time for peace. חעֵת לֶאֱהֹב וְעֵת לִשְׂנֹא עֵת מִלְחָמָה וְעֵת שָׁלוֹם:

 

Faith and Loss

No matter the sorrow, tragedy or the loss we may face, let us never, ever lose our faith.

I witnessed a miniscule slice of the Sassoon’s tragedy in my own family.  My mother lost her oldest son in an Air Force F-100 jet crash, his body also badly burned.  After a month-long search, his aircraft was found and his body recovered.  I was only about six years old, but for years I watched my faithful mother carry on with her life and do so much good for so many.  She was my role model and so involved in the early days of protecting Life and family.  On occasion in her solitude, I caught her weeping over that loss of her son.  Nothing is quite as difficult as the loss of a child.

The news of the Sassoon family’s loss became a metaphor.   I reflected on the losses experienced by those of us who have been fighting for the preservation of the family, marriage, a child’s need for both a mother and a father, and religious liberty.  The past two years have been stunningly swift in burning down these noble institutions under new, activist judge interpretations of the law.

Who would have imagined that Utah would be the first in a string of state-by-state cloned legal challenges?   Those of us who have sacrificed so much over the years are now in mourning these losses.  But we also know that God is in charge and that we will never give in.  We will be here tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow, because it is not just the earthly physical lives of our children being harmed, but their eternal souls are under attack.

I received two notes this week from friends in this fight that brought me to tears.

One was a forward on a comment a former campaign worker mentioned of me – that I was feared by both men and women.  I was grateful that he was defending my “principled” approach, and that he was concerned that it may have been a reason for my loss when I ran for U.S. Senate in 2010.  No doubt there were many reasons, but I have no regrets that I spoke the truth and if I was “feared,” so be it.  As Jesus said in Matthew 13:9, “Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.” Sometimes the truth is hard to hear and too many are hard of hearing.

Another comment was a heartfelt letter from a young woman who has joined the ranks of grassroots activists more recently and who has observed the onslaught of discouraging events that are destroying the civil rights of children in protecting their need to have both a mother and a father in a committed marriage relationship.

She wrote:

I’ve been pondering: It’s easy to make personal sacrifices to serve in our county and state when one knows one can make a difference for good. And if you know your team is winning, it’s even easier to want to join the team!

But what if one can’t make a difference for good because the majority supports the opposite? And what if your team keeps losing? What, then, IS the point of serving and sacrificing precious time with family? What’s the point of being sleep deprived with worry and concern and extra meetings and studying and research, and all the extra stress and responsibility, and feeling your health deteriorate, and seeing all the muck of dishonesty and hypocrisy up close in your face — even thrown IN your face??! Why, then, would I or anyone want to serve in my community, state, and/or country?

I’ve concluded (and must keep remembering) that men and women who truly know and love God, family, and this country won’t give up.

They physically can’t sit down and watch from the sidelines while others tear down God, family, and our country.

They have to be true to the inner voice inside them that insistently says, “YOU are on the right side! And you CAN make a difference!” even when we’re outnumbered, outmaneuvered, out-of-money, out-of-resources, out-of-time, out-of-every-last-drop-of-energy.

True Americans are true to correct principles even if they are not popular and the majority ignore them, mock them or twist them to their advantage.

True Americans are true to God first, and to serving Him, and to doing it His way simply because they know He’s always right, and that somehow it all works out in the end!

Our county, state, and nation need more true Americans like you to step up to the plate.

Thank you for stepping up to the plate over all these years and for being great examples to me.

Carry on! I’m following you!

Carry On

It’s true.  I am not engaged in this fight for Liberty because it’s fun or because I’m in a popularity contest for most likeable activist.  It’s not even what I had envisioned my life to be when I started out as a new bride, then a young mother raising five children.

I had always thought if I lived a good life and if I did the right things, or asked for forgiveness when I really messed up, the Lord would bless me and I’d spend my retiring years in contentment, playing with grandchildren on some Golden Pond somewhere in New Hampshire.

It’s been a different path. Not that the Lord hasn’t blessed me, but it has been a path full of bumps and stumbling blocks.  At times it looked as though I was on a dead end or even that I was falling off a cliff.

Today I’m either loved or hated for the views I express publicly.

The criticism comes sometimes even from friends and family, or those who only hear – or are influenced by – the news sound bites, opinions that almost always come from sources that either do not understand the issues, who cannot dig deeply enough into the crux of the point, or who actually believe the counterfeit arguments from a progressive media. It is sometimes daunting.

We all love to be on the winning team.  No one likes being a loser.  It’s a universal pursuit of happiness to succeed in an environment that supports success.

I come from a strong musical theatre background and have sung professionally for most of my adult life from Off-Broadway to National Tours to Regional Theatre and local community theatre.

One of the songs I sang from the 1970s was written by the masters of the Broadway showstoppers of the day – Kander and Ebb – called Maybe This Time.  “Everybody loves a winner,” the song goes.

When it comes to conservative policy in 2015, it appears we are losing, and as the lyrics continue: “so nobody loved me.”

How many times have I sat in the bleachers of a football game when the team I’m supporting is getting slaughtered?  It’s easy to criticize and to sideline quarterback. When one of my sons was out on that field in high school as a wide receiver, I understood more completely that real young men are out there playing an inner game of football.  The coaches are “building character,” we say, by teaching them not to give up –  even in the face of defeat – and how to turn the game around.

My own mother taught me to “take lemons and make lemonade.” At my first piano recital, I knew that song backwards and forwards, but as I sat at the piano bench my knees were knocking and my fingers shaking. I began, and not far into the song, I played a wrong chord. Five wrong tries later, I heard a desperate voice from the back of the audience, my mother, in a loud whisper: “Just go on.” And I did.

(I became a singer instead.)

But those three words “Just go on,” have made all the difference in my life.

How Shall We “Carry On?”

Although Utah’s marriage law was only one issue, it is the example for all issues.  We the People have allowed a single individual -a federal judge to unilaterally, without a hearing, strike down Utah’s constitutional law protecting marriage between a man and a woman in the false name of “civil rights.”

Why?  Because we have elected a majority of people who lack principle and who are of a weak character.

But whose “civil rights?”

In Australia, a socialist nation only a few steps farther down the road to serfdom from the United States,  abortion is a civil right, too.  Through its Medicare program, it’s “free.”

I’ll put it bluntly:  Australia has walked away from God’s law and has rewritten murder as a civil right.  When Roe v. Wade’s decision became the law of the land, we had lost.  We had to make a decision.  Do we pack up and go home and allow evil to win?

No.  Never.

The media would have you believe I and others who share the same view on principled governance are simply  “extremists.”  Even some of our “Republican” leaders in Utah call us “extremist” because we believe this nation has walked away from God and its once biblically-based jurisprudence.  We hear so much about “partisanship” and the need for “bipartisanship.”

What are they talking about?  How do you compromise between good and evil?  Compromise comes with the details of how to get something done, not the principles themselves.  When we ask for bi-partisan compromise and the issue is a moral issue, we are asking for those that believe the most to acquiesce to those who believe the least.  We then become  secular humanist in policy.  It is the tug of war between God and Caesar.  If you chart the direction this has been heading for decades, it will show a sharp loss of personal liberty and a huge gain in big government control.  Caesar is winning that war.

The loss of principled leadership brings a loss of liberty.  This is what compromising with evil does.

Now we have a strongly Republican Congress that is also blurry-eyed when it comes to principled leadership.  In short, we elected them to set this nation’s heart and soul right so that fiscal stability will follow (throughout history, it always does), and nothing is happening.  In fact, promises to stop the immorality of the redistribution of wealth in areas not enumerated to the federal government by forcing ObamaCare and Medicaid expansion (which uses taxpayer funds to support abortion), is a prime example.  Congress had the power of a check and balance on the US Supreme Court’s decision, but it went silent.

The inability of a Republican Congress to enforce the law on illegal immigration and to curtail the side effects of crime, drug cartels and the weakening of workforce wages defies its party platform.  To delay passage of a law to further restrict abortion, another party platform, is unconscionable.

This has not come at the hands of Democrats alone, but by the added support of Republicans.

This is not just problematic, it’s evidence that the Republican Party is merely a party of empty platitudes with candidates that are required to go through a Karl Rove sieve that has no intention of being that party of principle it once was.

Now talk show host Glenn Beck has announced he’s leaving the Republican Party.  As one who was for a short time on the top levels of a third party, I ask, just where will he go?  Our laws are crafted and guarded by the two parties that control the system.

My experience in a third party is that human nature will prevail unless the leadership of that party is principled.  The quest for power and unrighteous dominion over man’s free will is not necessarily overcome by establishing a third party.  Third parties on a national scale spend the majority of time simply getting ballot access, which wears volunteers down and impedes the ability to organize the candidate’s campaign.

What do we do then?

1. We do what we can to influence good wherever we are.  We do so because it is right, because it is God’s will, not man’s law, that governs our actions.  Our laws may turn against God’s law, and they have, but we still have the freedom to speak out, to act up, and to advocate for liberty.  Freedom isn’t free.

2. To our opponents I say:  Your liberty to do as you please, regardless of any moral standard, will continue to burn this nation’s house down and there will be a heavy price to pay to build it back up.

3. To the many leaders many stalwart leaders in the battle for the heart and soul of this nation who are feeling a deep loss and who are in mourning, I use my friend’s words:  “Carry on.”  The American founders consecrated all they had for liberty – their lives, fortunes and sacred honor.  They knew that religious liberty was so fundamental that they enshrined it as an unalienable right First and then ensured its protection in the Second Amendment – the right to bear arms.

May our prayers continue to be for the American people to wake up, for our hearts to turn back to God, for liberty to prevail.  We will not give up, even if we are temporarily “losing” and do not experience the immediate reward.  Because, as syndicated columnist Cal Thomas said many years ago, “I’ve read the Book, and in the end WE win!”

Here’s Jackie Evancho singing The Lord’s Prayer. It is my prayer that this performance by a 12 year old that has a gift from God will inspire you, and that it will keep this eternal perspective in view as we continue in this Good fight.  Win or lose, we will stay the course.

It’s the end of another Sunday, that day of rest for those of us that honor the Sabbath on this day.  As the evening draws around, I wanted to share some personal thoughts. We are engaged in the cause of preserving our children’s future, rooted in the family – the foundation of that free society […]

Read More

Protect Religious Liberty with a Balanced Solution

0 No Comments

Support HB 322
Religious Liberty Act

The LGBT nondiscrimination bills SB 296 and SB 297 both passed and are on the way to the Utah governor’s office for signing into law. Neither of these bills has religious liberty protections for individuals. SB 297 protects government employees and their families only.

HB 322 is the only bill that addresses individual religious liberty and MUST pass if we are to have a BALANCED solution.

The Washington Post has described HB 396 as

Today is the last day of the Utah legislative session. We must act NOW!

ACTION

1. Contact by phone and email members of the Utah State Senate.
2. Type the following in the subject line of your email:
VOTE YES – HB 322 – Religious Liberty Act – L. Christensen-Jackson
3. Suggested comments: HB 322 is a balanced approach and the only bill that protects individual religious liberty and freedom of conscience for ALL.

Here are some national leaders that support this legislation and what they have to say:

Reverend Bill and Dr. Deborah Owens
President, National Coalition of African-American Pastors

It is offensive that comparisons to African-American civil rights have been made in the Utah debate. Our ancestors were slaves. They had no property rights, no voting rights, no citizenship rights. The African-American community of pastors who minister to millions are a strong, religious, God-fearing people. Not only should religious institutions and affiliates be given protections, but our individual adherents must also be protected. This bill achieves that balance.

Paul McHugh, MD
Former Chief of Psychiatry, Distinguished Service Professor, Johns Hopkins University Hospital – Baltimore, MD

…policy makers and the media are doing no favors either to the public or the transgendered …. advocates for the transgendered have persuaded several states—including California, New Jersey and Massachusetts—to pass laws barring psychiatrists, even with parental permission, from striving to restore natural gender feelings to a transgender minor. That government can intrude into parents’ rights to seek help in guiding their children indicates how powerful these advocates have become.

We at Johns Hopkins University—which in the 1960s was the first American medical center to venture into “sex-reassignment surgery”—launched a study in the 1970s comparing the outcomes of transgendered people who had the surgery with the outcomes of those who did not. Most of the surgically treated patients described themselves as “satisfied” by the results, but their subsequent psycho-social adjustments were no better than those who didn’t have the surgery. And so at Hopkins we stopped doing sex-reassignment surgery, since producing a “satisfied” but still troubled patient seemed an inadequate reason for surgically amputating normal organs.

–”Transgender Surgery Isn’t the Solution,” Wall Street Journal – 6/12/2014

This bill respects the integrity of medical science and individual religious liberty. – Dr. McHugh

Paul Church, MD
Urologist, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (Harvard) – Boston, MA

As a specialist in male sexual dysfunction on staff at one of the nation’s most highly respected medical institutions, where I am presently under review for my religious beliefs, I support this legislation because it protects individual religious liberty and conscience to practice medical science against emotional rhetoric. SB 396 and SB 397 do not.

David Pickup
Ex-gay, therapist, plaintiff in SCOTUS case defending SOCE therapy, outlawed in CA and NJ – Los Angeles, CA and Dallas, TX

In California it is now against the law for parents to take their minor children who are confused about their sex or struggling with homosexuality to a counselor for help. We are in the Courts fighting for our First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and assembly. This bill will provide fairness to and protection of our profession and our individual religious liberty and freedom of individual conscience.

Janet Boynes
President, Janet Boynes Ministries, Minneapolis, MN

As a former lesbian, I am now a Christian minister to those who want to leave the homosexual lifestyle, I support HB 322 as a protection to individual religious beliefs for those of us who are called to minister to those who are suffering and for those who seek faith-based help.

Brian Camenker
President, Mass Resistance – Boston, MA

After listening to two Utah hearings online, I was surprised to learn that in Utah Republicans are using the same rhetoric that Democrats use in Massachusetts. If religious institutions must carve out such dramatic exemptions for themselves in SB 396, and because SB 397 is limited only to government employees, then HB 322 is absolutely necessary for individuals and members of those religious faiths left unprotected in SB 396 and SB 397.

Frank Mylar

Attorney, Alliance Defending Freedom

Hobby Lobby – Conestego Wood, Amicus Curiae, US Supreme Court

Utah has passed two bills, SB 396 and 397, which do not protect individual religious liberties and conscience. As an attorney that has successfully defended some of this nation’s landmark religious liberty cases, including Alliance Defending Freedom’s amicus brief in the Hobby Lobby case which it won, it is imperative that HB 322 provide a much-needed balance to offset the flaws and limitations of the other two bills.

 

Support HB 322 Religious Liberty Act The LGBT nondiscrimination bills SB 296 and SB 297 both passed and are on the way to the Utah governor’s office for signing into law. Neither of these bills has religious liberty protections for individuals. SB 297 protects government employees and their families only. HB 322 is the only […]

Read More

Southern Baptists Part Ways with Utah’s LGBT Bill

0 No Comments

…And they remind Utah’s legislators that their actions may affect the rest of the nation in redefining the standard for protected classes.

The key issue for Utah’s legislators in deciding which way to vote on SB 296 hangs on the constitutional question of “strict scrutiny.”

Although the Southern Baptist Convention has found ways in the past to work together with other faiths that hold divergent doctrines, its president, Russell Moore, has declared they will part ways from Utah’s proposal on LGBT rights.

He has provided an excellent analysis of SB 296 – Nondiscrimination and Religious Freedom Amendments in a blog post and has concluded that the bill falls short of what should be mutual goals of religious institutions to strengthen their First Amendment rights amid challenges from the LGBT community.

The Southern Baptist Convention sees what we and many others also see: SB 296 protects religious institutions and affiliates, but it does NOT protect the private citizens – the Dan Cathy’s of Chick Fil-A or the Green’s of Hobby Lobby.

Tony Perkins and Peter Sprigg of Family Research Council also see what we see and have published an article about Utah’s bill.

The religious discrimination that florists, photographers, bakers and t-shirt makers have faced from the LGBT activists that have caused them to either shut down their businesses or to pay fines will be left as unfair game for the LGBT activists to use and abuse with this legislation.

Moore brings up a great point, one that is being silenced: Homosexuals are NOT born that way and homosexuality CAN be changed.

He says that homosexuality is not immutable (unchangeable). He is concerned that the Utah “national model” protects a group that does not rise to the “strict scrutiny” standard of the Court on a par with traditional protected classes that DO rise to that standard. This is currently a required Court standard in order to qualify for special classification.

If you didn’t know that, you probably are too young to have fought the Equal Rights Amendment as I did and we learned all about the Court definitions for civil rights.

I have watched as Utah Senators and Representatives have voiced their uneducated opinions in committee hearings and on floor debates. They repeated over and over the mantra, “They’re born that way.”

More than one said, “I didn’t used to believe this, and then I got to know a gay person. Now I see it differently and I know they aren’t born that way.”

Really? What was your source of information?

This debate has become far too emotional. It has lost all rational perspective. I am asking everyone to take a deep breath, step back from there emotion and begin listening to the voices of reason, of medical science and the scientific method.

If you are an elected official in Utah or anywhere, do not make the uneducated mistake of rising to this issue and saying you have compassion on a group of people that were born that way.

Our Frustration

After several years of providing ample opportunities for elected officials to come out and get that education, sadly less than a handful have done so. We have held home gatherings, public gatherings, online webinars and video conferences – every possible way to reach our legislators. They have not cared enough to attend.

I was utterly stunned to listen to how many shared their compassion for those that are “born that way.” Who told them this? And what is the source of that medical science?

Simon LeVay conducted a brain study years ago, but he later recognized that too many ex-gays were choosing not to live that life style, and he acknowledged the limitations of his own research. The twin studies did not show any evidence. No genetic studies show there is anything inborn.

Some correlation exists between a woman who takes fertility drugs and male children born with a higher level of estrogen, producing more effeminate traits, which can be easily corrected.

The fact is: no reputable medical or social science exists to show homosexuals are “born that way.” But to hear the testimonies from the committees and the floor, in favor of an unproven sound bite, led me to believe that the LGBT lobbyists did one heck of a job influencing them since the last legislative session.

Here is a summary of the research compiled by Douglas A. Abbott PhD, July 2007:

Critique of Past Research
The genetic theory of homosexuality rests on a foundation of three seminal studies in the early 1990’s– which all have serious methodological, sampling, and interpretation problems. Simon LeVay (1991) dissected the brains of 19 gay men and supposedly 16 non-gay men and found, on average, a slighter smaller area of the hypothalamus (INAH-3) in the gay men. He then “suggests that sexual orientation has a biological substrate.” There were several major flaws with his research: (a) the sample was small, (b) the control group was inappropriate, (c) there is no evidence that the INAH-3 part of the brain had anything to do with sexual preference, (d) AIDS could have caused the brain differences, and (e) the study has never been replicated.

Michael Bailey and Richard Pillard (1991) concluded there must be a genetic cause to homosexuality because they found higher rates of homosexuality among identical than fraternal twins and even less concordance (similarity) among adopted siblings. These quantitative genetic studies have similar limitations. First, the samples may be biased because researchers usually recruit a volunteer sample from gay publications and organizations. Second, such studies require a large sample in order to make valid heritability estimates, and samples are usually small. Third, environmental factors are usually not studied so its effects are unaccounted for. Forth, there are obvious interpretation problems because only about half of identical twins reared in the same family have a gay brother. If genes determined homosexuality then both brothers should be gay. Fifth, other twin studies have not supported their claim of a strong genetic component to homosexuality (see Hershberger, 1997).

Here is a list of other resources.

Strict Scrutiny Trampled in Utah?
The key constitutional question Utah’s legislature must focus on now is to meet the Court’s standard of “strict scrutiny.”

Simply put, the Court holds a standard that must be met for class discrimination cases.  Homosexual behavior is not immutable, or unchangeable. It is not politically powerless (they have voting rights, citizenship). And homosexuals certainly have made an amazing contribution to society in many fields.  I am well aware of those contributions in the performing arts, as I owned an entertainment-related company in New York City and 50% of my staff I hired was gay.

By its very definition, homosexuality cannot therefore constitutionally be designated a special protected class.  If Utah passes SB 296, it will see a rise in lawsuits to test and clarify the flaws that were not given enough time to fix.

Family Research Council has published an excellent policy paper on this constitutional topic in a brochure that explains the constitutional standard and shows medical science studies to show why the behavior should not be protected titled Homosexuality Is Not A Civil Right

The Constitutional Issue

Does your state legislator know what these equal protection definitions are? If he or she doesn’t, that representative is not qualified to cast a vote on such a bill. Here’s a more detailed crash course.

The Court sets different standards or tests for protections.  It must be justified by a compelling governmental interest, although that has never been adequately defined how that is determined, but it generally refers to something necessary and crucial as opposed to merely preferred, such as national security, preserving life (pro-Life? hmmm – you can see how judges ignore what they wish) and not violating explicit constitutional protections.

The law or policy must be narrowly tailored to achieve that goal or interest. If it’s too broad or fails to address essential aspects of the compelling interest, then the rule is not considered narrowly tailored.

It must use the least restrictive means to achieve that interest, meaning there cannot be an easier way to arrive at the compelling government interest.

Suspect Classification and Strict Scrutiny

The Supreme Court has established standards for determining whether a statute or policy’s classification requires the use of strict scrutiny.  In order to pass strict scrutiny, it must be a “suspect class.”

This means it must demonstrate the following three characteristics:

The class must have experienced a history of discrimination;

  • It must be definable as a group based on “obvious, immutable, or distinguishing characteristics;”
  • It must be a minority or “politically powerless;” and,
  • Its characteristics must have little relationship to the government’s policy aims or the ability of the group’s members to contribute to society.

For example, the Court has consistently found that for the broadcasting field, classifications based on race, national origin, and alienage require strict scrutiny review to qualify in the category of affirmative-action programs.

LGBTQA+ etc. – The New Civil Rights?

The LGBT activists consistently compare their situation to the civil rights of slaves and African-American people.  The reason African-Americans are so offended at this comparison is obvious.  In no way does homosexuality meet this Court standard.

Enter the Rational Basis Review.  This is the default standard for constitutional questions that are applied to Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. Rational basis is being used in the LGBT cases in the appellate courts to determine whether the law is a legitimate government interest, and whether real or hypothetical.

Homosexuals are not a race. The Fourteenth Amendment rational basis review has been used in applications far beyond its original intent.

Homosexuality is NOT immutable, or unchangeable such as skin color, biological sex, etc.  It is nearly impossible to distinguish a gay man from a straight man, in many instances.  And many have admitted that they have chosen that lifestyle or have departed from it.  It is NOT immutable.

Yes, those who identify as homosexual (some bi-sexual and an alphabet list that keeps growing) are a minority.

But to suggest that the LGBT community is politically powerless (cannot cast a vote or do not have citizenship) is ridiculous and unsubstantiated.  Fundraising alone runs circles around the heterosexual community.  The Human Rights Campaign is around $40 million a year.  The Southern Law Poverty Center around $123 million annually, to name two fundraising organizations.

If Utah adds SOGI (sexual orientation and gender identity) language to its law, it is setting a precedent for others to follow, and it could potentially re-write the U.S. Supreme Court’s definition.

Practically speaking, if this happens, what other behavior will be next in line to include in the long list of protected classes?

Do Utah’s legislators have any idea how their action may impact constitutional law, for the worse?

Strict Scrutiny and Religious Liberty

About 60% of the time, religious liberty has met a strict scrutiny standard in the Courts.  We are grateful that the religious community is beginning to “scrutinize” themselves the serious nature of the course Utah may be charting for the rest of the nation as this bill is being marketed as the national model, funded by liberal think tanks such as Brookings Institution and Williams Institute at UCLA.

Here is a list of experts that were not given time or a hearing to testify in Utah against this bill that will apparently be the model in their states and which they each have shared concerns.

If you are a member of the Utah State Legislature, or if you are a voter in Utah, please contact them now to share this message. Vote NO – SB 296

Why Natl Experts Oppose SB 296

Contact your Utah legislator now.

We appreciate your support so we can continue to keep you updated and informed.  Please text “ALF” at 313131 to give a generous contribution of any amount.  Or click on the donate tab at the top of this page.

The full text of Dr. McHugh’s Wall Street Journal article (emphasis, mine)

The government and media alliance advancing the transgender cause has gone into overdrive in recent weeks. On May 30, a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services review board ruled that Medicare can pay for the “reassignment” surgery sought by the transgendered—those who say that they don’t identify with their biological sex. Earlier last month Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said that he was “open” to lifting a ban on transgender individuals serving in the military. Time magazine, seeing the trend, ran a cover story for its June 9 issue called “The Transgender Tipping Point: America’s next civil rights frontier.”

Yet policy makers and the media are doing no favors either to the public or the transgendered by treating their confusions as a right in need of defending rather than as a mental disorder that deserves understanding, treatment and prevention. This intensely felt sense of being transgendered constitutes a mental disorder in two respects. The first is that the idea of sex misalignment is simply mistaken—it does not correspond with physical reality. The second is that it can lead to grim psychological outcomes.

The transgendered suffer a disorder of “assumption” like those in other disorders familiar to psychiatrists. With the transgendered, the disordered assumption is that the individual differs from what seems given in nature—namely one’s maleness or femaleness. Other kinds of disordered assumptions are held by those who suffer from anorexia and bulimia nervosa, where the assumption that departs from physical reality is the belief by the dangerously thin that they are overweight.

With body dysmorphic disorder, an often socially crippling condition, the individual is consumed by the assumption “I’m ugly.” These disorders occur in subjects who have come to believe that some of their psycho-social conflicts or problems will be resolved if they can change the way that they appear to others. Such ideas work like ruling passions in their subjects’ minds and tend to be accompanied by a solipsistic argument.

For the transgendered, this argument holds that one’s feeling of “gender” is a conscious, subjective sense that, being in one’s mind, cannot be questioned by others. The individual often seeks not just society’s tolerance of this “personal truth” but affirmation of it. Here rests the support for “transgender equality,” the demands for government payment for medical and surgical treatments, and for access to all sex-based public roles and privileges.

With this argument, advocates for the transgendered have persuaded several states—including California, New Jersey and Massachusetts—to pass laws barring psychiatrists, even with parental permission, from striving to restore natural gender feelings to a transgender minor. That government can intrude into parents’ rights to seek help in guiding their children indicates how powerful these advocates have become.

How to respond? Psychiatrists obviously must challenge the solipsistic concept that what is in the mind cannot be questioned. Disorders of consciousness, after all, represent psychiatry’s domain; declaring them off-limits would eliminate the field. Many will recall how, in the 1990s, an accusation of parental sex abuse of children was deemed unquestionable by the solipsists of the “recovered memory” craze.

You won’t hear it from those championing transgender equality, but controlled and follow-up studies reveal fundamental problems with this movement. When children who reported transgender feelings were tracked without medical or surgical treatment at both Vanderbilt University and London’s Portman Clinic, 70%-80% of them spontaneously lost those feelings. Some 25% did have persisting feelings; what differentiates those individuals remains to be discerned.

We at Johns Hopkins University—which in the 1960s was the first American medical center to venture into “sex-reassignment surgery”—launched a study in the 1970s comparing the outcomes of transgendered people who had the surgery with the outcomes of those who did not. Most of the surgically treated patients described themselves as “satisfied” by the results, but their subsequent psycho-social adjustments were no better than those who didn’t have the surgery. And so at Hopkins we stopped doing sex-reassignment surgery, since producing a “satisfied” but still troubled patient seemed an inadequate reason for surgically amputating normal organs.

It now appears that our long-ago decision was a wise one. A 2011 study at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden produced the most illuminating results yet regarding the transgendered, evidence that should give advocates pause. The long-term study—up to 30 years—followed 324 people who had sex-reassignment surgery. The study revealed that beginning about 10 years after having the surgery, the transgendered began to experience increasing mental difficulties. Most shockingly, their suicide mortality rose almost 20-fold above the comparable nontransgender population. This disturbing result has as yet no explanation but probably reflects the growing sense of isolation reported by the aging transgendered after surgery. The high suicide rate certainly challenges the surgery prescription.

There are subgroups of the transgendered, and for none does “reassignment” seem apt. One group includes male prisoners like Pvt. Bradley Manning, the convicted national-security leaker who now wishes to be called Chelsea. Facing long sentences and the rigors of a men’s prison, they have an obvious motive for wanting to change their sex and hence their prison. Given that they committed their crimes as males, they should be punished as such; after serving their time, they will be free to reconsider their gender.

Another subgroup consists of young men and women susceptible to suggestion from “everything is normal” sex education, amplified by Internet chat groups. These are the transgender subjects most like anorexia nervosa patients: They become persuaded that seeking a drastic physical change will banish their psycho-social problems. “Diversity” counselors in their schools, rather like cult leaders, may encourage these young people to distance themselves from their families and offer advice on rebutting arguments against having transgender surgery. Treatments here must begin with removing the young person from the suggestive environment and offering a counter-message in family therapy.

Then there is the subgroup of very young, often prepubescent children who notice distinct sex roles in the culture and, exploring how they fit in, begin imitating the opposite sex. Misguided doctors at medical centers including Boston’s Children’s Hospital have begun trying to treat this behavior by administering puberty-delaying hormones to render later sex-change surgeries less onerous—even though the drugs stunt the children’s growth and risk causing sterility. Given that close to 80% of such children would abandon their confusion and grow naturally into adult life if untreated, these medical interventions come close to child abuse. A better way to help these children: with devoted parenting.

At the heart of the problem is confusion over the nature of the transgendered. “Sex change” is biologically impossible. People who undergo sex-reassignment surgery do not change from men to women or vice versa. Rather, they become feminized men or masculinized women. Claiming that this is civil-rights matter and encouraging surgical intervention is in reality to collaborate with and promote a mental disorder.

Dr. McHugh, former psychiatrist in chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital, is the author of “Try to Remember: Psychiatry’s Clash Over Meaning, Memory, and Mind” (Dana Press, 2008
).

…And they remind Utah’s legislators that their actions may affect the rest of the nation in redefining the standard for protected classes. The key issue for Utah’s legislators in deciding which way to vote on SB 296 hangs on the constitutional question of “strict scrutiny.” Although the Southern Baptist Convention has found ways in the […]

Read More

The Beehive State Is About to Send a Real Stinger to Your State

0 No Comments

Only three days remaining in the Utah State Legislative session. But why should you care?

Because a very bad SOGI bill (sexual orientation – gender identity “nondiscrimination” bill) is making its way on the fast track to passage in Utah.

It is being promoted as the model for the rest of the nation. Indeed, next week a liberal think tank is hosting a meeting in Washington DC to promote it in all 50 states.

If you are in Utah, please contact your legislators and ask them to vote NO, SB 296 – Antidiscrimination and Religious Liberty – Urquhart-Adams-Dee

Here is a brief report, plus a report from Family Research Council and why SOGI bills are NOT a matter of civil rights.

You won’t believe who’s who on the liberal Left funding this entire campaign. We must stop it now, and we need your help right away.

About SB 296 - Antidiscrimination and Religious Liberty

This bill redefines SEX, does NOT protect individual religious liberty and would seriously harm individual business owners.

It was announced on last week and within 24 hours was on the fast track in Senate hearings. We were not given enough advance notice to research who is behind this bill last week – nor time to bring in our expert witnesses from around the country.

But now we are putting the pieces together. We know who’s behind this bad bill.  The organizations backing this measure as a national model are liberal, Leftist, socialist think tanks that support the Democratic Party with millions of dollars.

Yet, Republicans have been carrying their spears in the Utah State Senate. How could this happen?

These liberal think tanks are not only circling around SB 296 to pass it first in Utah, and not only are they involved in promoting it nationally, but they have been involved in its very development!

This bill does NOT protect the rights of individual religious liberty and conscience.
We will continue to get you as much information as we can as soon as we are able.  We must stop passage of this bill before it gets to your state.

Here’s what Family Research Council said in its Washington Update, Monday, March 9, 2015

Screen Shot 2015-03-10 at 1.10.29 AM
In Beehive State, SOGI Bill Still Stings

While other states slam the brakes on local SOGI (sexual orientation-gender identity) ordinances, Utah is moving stubbornly ahead. Leaders in the state have managed to convince people that they can do something no one else has: strike a balance between special sexuality rights and religious liberty. While small businesses across America continue proving Utah wrong, the Mormon church is intent on pulling the legislation over the finish line.

On Friday, the state Senate voted in a landslide 23-5 to ignore the cautionary tales of the Houston, San Antonio, and Springfield ordinances and give government the license to punish anyone who doesn’t believe in their radical ideas of sexuality. While the LDS church insists the measure carves out exemptions for religious groups, the bill offers about as much coverage as a fig leaf. As usual, the Left trotted out their familiar — but misguided — comparisons between the homosexuality and the racial persecution of times past. “This is the civil rights issue of our time,” one of the Democratic senators exclaimed.

That didn’t sit well with his African-American colleague, Alvin Jackson. Like many, he’s tired of the false — and offensive — comparison between race and sexuality. “To me, their collective efforts have been minimized, when you take that list that has race on it, and you put sexual orientation and gender identity right next to it. I cannot accept that,” he fired back. “I’m a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I’m proud to say that. But my black Baptist roots won’t allow me to accept what’s in this legislation.”

FRC has tried to put these arguments in perspective, even writing an entire policy brief called, “Homosexuality is not a civil right.” As Peter Sprigg explains, “The stories of Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, Jr. have become an inspiring part of American history. It’s not surprising that homosexual activists have tried to hitch their caboose to the ‘civil rights’ train… [But] when homosexual activists talk about their ‘civil rights,’ they are not talking about their constitutional rights, which have never been systematically denied to them as a class (unlike the historical experience of black Americans)…”

Unlike skin color, sexual behavior isn’t immutable, inborn, or involuntary. While homosexuals can change their behavior, a person can’t change his ethnicity. As such, there is no compelling, logical basis for treating homosexuality as a protected category under civil rights laws, or for granting special protection against “discrimination” based on “sexual orientation.” In the civil rights movement, African-Americans were unable to bring about political and cultural change because they were disenfranchised through laws restricting their vote and their voice. The homosexual community that regularly boasts of their political power and financial influence can make no such claim.

Who’s Who Behind Utah’s SOGI Bill, the “national model?”

A Deseret News article sited the Brookings Institution.

Brookings published this article in support of the LDS Church’s bill the day following the Church’s announcement, entitled “Mormon-LGBT civil-rights deal breaks new ground in Utah.” It is a glowing report of the “compromise” and it announces that Brookings is even holding a special event on March 16 to promote the legislation nationally. The event will feature “key players from Utah as well as national experts.”  It gives this link for sign up.

It might be good to know more about Brookings. Some like to call Brookings a “centrist” organization. The group of Republicans in Utah behind Count My Vote, the campaign to destroy the constitutional republican form of elections – the neighborhood caucus – also calls themselves the “centrists,”  “mainstream Republicans.”  They don’t regard the party platform with any more allegiance or loyalty than they do this founding document we call the U. S. Constitution.

Those who oppose the “centrists” are trying to preserve a system that has its roots in the philosophies of the Founders of this nation, which were truly the “centrists” – on the center right of the political spectrum.

These same Utah centrists typically call the Founders old dead men with dead ideas.  To them the US Constitution is in need of constant revision and is a “living” document.

According to this source, in 1916 Brookings originally supported Republican economics and developed the Marshall Plan to help Europe and Japan rebuild after World War II, totaling about $160 billion in today’s dollars.

Today, foreign aid today has become the vehicle for redistribution of the wealth globally, negotiated at the United Nations. I’ve been in those negotiating rooms. I can testify first-hand that they hate the U.S. The primary reason they come to the U.N. is to grab some of that American “wealth.”

Thank you, Brookings?

By the 1960s Brookings was known as the establishment Democrat think tank and supported “Keynesian economics,” Keynes himself being an English Fabian socialist. Keynesian economics is the economics of debt- based federal budgeting and deficit spending.

Today it is alarming to know that Republican politicians so widely accept this liberal, Big government economic concept, the catalyst of the trillions of dollars of debt the United States has built.

This source calls Brookings a “principal Democratic think tank.” Records show that Haim Saban, although pro-Israel, is 155th largest donor to the Democratic Party and has contributed between $5 and $10 million to the Clinton Foundation. The DNC shows that in the year 2001-2002 Saban “exceeded $10 million, the largest single source up to that time.”

On another front, Brookings was among the front-runners in the 1980s to promote education reform through “school choice,” a popular “Republican” idea.  But wait.   Read this:

The intent was not to keep private schools in the equation of choice, a truly free enterprise concept, but instead to create a new public school that combined private with public vouchers and which would destroy the private school option.

The Brookings website gives an overview of its pro-Big government stance, especially in education – advocating for growing the federal role in Washington, additional funding for early childhood education or pre-kindergarten and more global education, all goals of advocates for what is called “common core” reforms today.

In 1990, Terry Moe and John Chubb wrote a definitive work, Politics, Markets and America’s Schools.

On the MacNeil/Lehrer News Hour, John Chubb said of their research, “The government is not looking for the privatization of education, bur rather for a system of full public school choice where people will be able to choose among schools that all are playing by the same ground rules. So, the future of private schools that don’t play by the rules is that they will be phased out because they will not be accredited and the children will not be allowed to get into higher education or get jobs.”

Not surprisingly, Brookings has long been an advocate for common core standards.  Need we go further in our longstanding assertion that common core reforms and the annihilation of private schools was all part of the voucher and charter school strategy?

Back to the Deseret News article, citing Jonathan Rauch, a Senior Fellow at Brookings.  Who is he?

Rauch is a radical homosexual, pro-LGBT activist who believes that without marriage no gay person can be whole.  Here’s what he said about this “LGBT – Mormon civil rights deal – breaking new ground for Utah.

Here’s the pro-marriage Witherspoon Institute’s commentary on Rauch’s personal memoir Denial: 25 Years Without A soul.

Another LGBT Activist on Stage with Utah’s New Gay Deal

The news conference endorsing SB 296 also included another person of interest:  Troy Williams.  All smiles he stood on the platform and praised the supporters of this bill, religious leaders and politicians.  Then afterward in his own LGBT press conference, he commented that it was “the first step to getting everything we want,” which he predicted will happen in the next two years.

Praytell, what more do they want beyond being included in a special protected class with those other groups that actually qualify to be there because their characteristics are immutable?

Here is the transcript of the video of Troy speaking at a rally on April 10, 2006 near the Brigham Young University campus and comments by the people that provided the video and transcript:

We all have an opportunity to experience a much-needed dose of reality in the form of Troy Williams, a homosexual (he calls himself queer) who spoke at a Soulforce Equality Ride rally in Provo’s Kiwanis Park April 10, 2006. We were there and videoed the gathering in its entirety.
Troy was the first and by far the most confident and zealous of several speakers who came up to the stage and spoke in the microphone to an audience of over 100. He was introduced as the producer at KRLC of a new local radio show called “Now Queer This.”
He spoke up loud and clear (there’s only one line I couldn’t make out) and what follows is a written transcript I made from our camcorder. Troy appeared to be an all-American, regular kind of guy in his twenties with a shock of blond curly hair, wearing jeans and a BYU parody-type t-shirt under a loose-fitting, faded denim jacket. He seemed at ease in front of people and spoke with a lot of energy and movement, throwing his arms clear out to the sides. These are his exact words (I have added a few emphases and crowd reactions in accordance with his delivery):
“Oh my God, I feel like I’m a latter-day Samuel the Lamanite up on the wall! Don’t throw any arrows at me okay? It’s so cool to be here with you today.
I’m a former BYU student, I’m a returned [LDS] missionary and I’m an out-loud, active queer man. But I have to confess I only attended BYU for one semester after my mission because it was very evident to me very quickly that I didn’t fit in there and the least of those reasons was because of my latent queerness. And when I kinda look around I don’t think it’s a bad thing not fitting in, I think it’s a pretty damn good thing not fitting in.
I’m somebody who chose to be queer. I don’t believe I was born this way. I chose it. And if I was reincarnated tomorrow I would choose it again. (Applause) Being queer is something that I totally want to be. I love it. I don’t believe that being queer is a genetic accident. I don’t believe it’s something I need to apologize for. And I don’t need to make excuses about it. And I don’t believe it is a sin. And I don’t believe that it’s something I need to work to overcome. It’s not a trial, it’s not a burden. Being queer is a blessing, it is a privilege and it is a gift from God.
I want to get this message out to everybody. Queer is good and queer does good for the world. We have so much to teach people about love and compassion. My queer friends are artists, we are musicians, we are actors, we are filmmakers, we are yoga instructors. We are everywhere. We are a powerful creative life force and we will not deny and we will not squelch that. And I think that being queer and the people who are queer around me have an unparalleled understanding of humanity.
I think there’s a big problem that we get into when we start enforcing a victim narrative. We are not victims. Yes, BYU, and yes, the LDS Church may oppress us. They may excommunicate us. They may try to legislate away our freedom. They may work to deny us our civil liberties. But we are not victims.
The Church is a victim of its own fear and its own myopic vision. They cannot see the beauty and the power of those people who they cast from the fold. They can’t remember that they were once a despised minority that were driven, persecuted and killed and we need to remind them of that.
The LDS Church sees us as deviants, sinners, and perverts and I believe that those are some of our best qualities! (Laughter and applause). Don’t buy into their story. Don’t buy into their narrative. You are a powerful, passionate people and you are a conduit for revelation, for spirituality and for life. So own that and be that, all right?
Okay, my last closing comments, this is very important, I need all the cameras to do a zoom-in, this is the dramatic moment,’kay? (Laughter.) I have a proclamation to give to the world. (Derisive laughter.) As a young Mormon boy growing up and some, many, of you have experienced this I’m sure as well, we were all taught that at one time in the future the prophet would once again command his people to live plural marriage. Now we’ve all been taught this, it’s part of Mormon folk theology, it’s Church doctrine, right?
So I want you all to know that when that time comes you latter-day saints when the prophet calls you once again to take multiple wives we in the gay community will stand in solidarity with you to repeal Amendment 3! We will stand in common cause with the Mormons so that you can practice and live your faith according to the dictates of your hearts. We and then we too can marry according to the dictates of our own desires and passions!
We will stand with the latter-day saints when that day comes, right? Right? God bless you all, Queers, Mormons, you are the queerest people out there! (Laughter) I want you to embrace that. . . (now shouting) You have a legacy of plural marriage! You were cast out, you were despised! Join with us! Join in solidarity with the queers! Be one with us and we will be one with you! Thank you.”

Stay tuned for the next segment of who’s who and who’s influencing politics in Utah – and the nation: The Williams Institute at UCLA.  Who are they and why are they contributing to Utah’s New Gay Deal?

Please … we need your generous contributions today so that we can continue to get this information to you.  We thank you in advance:  Text “ALF” to 313131 or click on this donate button:

Donate_Now

Only three days remaining in the Utah State Legislative session. But why should you care? Because a very bad SOGI bill (sexual orientation – gender identity “nondiscrimination” bill) is making its way on the fast track to passage in Utah. It is being promoted as the model for the rest of the nation. Indeed, next […]

Read More

Utah Red Alert: Update – Pro-LGBT Bill on Fast Track

0 No Comments

White background - longHB 322 – Religious Liberty and Nondiscrimination Protection – L Christensen.

Please support this bill as opposed to SB 296 – Antidiscrimination and Religious Liberty Amendments – Urquhart

HB 322 protects individual religious liberty, SB 296 does NOT!

SB 296 is  mis-named.  It is NOT a religious liberty bill because it does not protect people of faith, only institutions and it leaves some huge gaps in protections for doctors, therapists and businesses in general such as Hobby Lobby and Chick Fila that have religiously held beliefs among its ownership, for example.  It is fast-tracked for a vote TODAY, Friday, March 6, 2015 at 3 PM TIME CERTAIN.

ACTION
Please contact ALL Senators immediately. Ask them to VOTE NO on SB 296: Antidiscrimination and Religous Liberty Amendments (Urquhart-Adams).

Click here to contact your Senator.

Talking Points
This bill has several flaws:

1. We need more time to review and inform voters and others who will be affected negatively by this legislation.

For a bill that demands “fairness,” what kind of fairness is there in a thirty-five page bill that dramatically changes the definition of sex to “gender identity” – the first time ever in Utah history – and that has been given less than 24 hours to to review?

In less than 24 hours, we have not had time to bring in expert witnesses from Johns Hopkins University, Harvard and Los Angeles – all who were willing to be there to testify.

We have barely had time to get the information to those reading this blog post in time to respond for the scheduled 8 AM hearing.

This is not what we expect from our Utah legislators. This is what happens only in Washington DC, right? Wrong. It’s happening now, right here in UTAH!

2. This bill protects institutions, associations and affiliates, but it leaves you and me – the individual religious adherent vulnerable and “under the bus.”

This is unacceptable. Another bill in the House, HB 322, sponsored by Representative LaVar Christensen and by your colleague Senator Al Jackson in the Senate, has the proper balance and DOES protect individuals. We cannot pass SB 296 without removing this flaw, but the sponsors have told us it is NOT AMENDABLE!

The easier and more logical solution is to support HB 322 – Religious Liberty and Nondiscrimination Protections when it comes to the Senate.

3.Lines 105-109, page 4: SB 296 uses the DSM-5 definition of “gender identity.” This is the very organization that is trying to shut down therapists and counselors and doctors around the country who desire to help their clients based on their religious beliefs, and we should trust that source to protect our First Amendment liberties?

Even at BYU, the APA accredits the psychology department. The chairman told me that they cannot teach the students any form of therapy that would involve religious teachings if the program is to stay accredited.

In California, it is now against the law for parents to take their minor children who are confused about their sex or struggling with homosexuality to a counselor for help. These therapists are now in the Courts fighting for their First Amendment rights. I serve on their national task force and am following this disturbing trend closely.

Where is the fairness or protection to them in this bill?

In addition, putting this DSM definition into this bill removes not only fairness from the medical field, it ignores the integrity of medical science and ignores the conflict that exists between medical doctors and the DSM.

Solid medical science has proven DNA, which defines whether a person is a male or a female. While surgery can alter physical body parts, it cannot alter DNA. A person is born either male or female.

Yet Utah legislators are about to consider a proposal that undermines the integrity of medical science without hearing from respected doctors who disagree with that definition and who have longitudinal studies they have not been given time to present.

Putting this language into Utah law will leave the therapist or doctor on staff at a hospital unprotected and at risk of discrimination should they are forced to provide services they do not believe in religiously or ethically, as is already happening in California under similar laws.

4. Lines 681-685, P. 23: This bill appears to require employers to provide bathrooms, locker rooms and shower facilities specifically for the transgendered. Yet the bill has no fiscal note attached. We have no idea what the cost to taxpayers or employers will be, let alone how companies may have to increase their prices to the consumer to accommodate yet another building regulation. There has been no time to get this information to businesses that may be adversely affected.

The REAL Story Behind Why Utah Would Support an LGBT Bill and What Happened in the Senate Hearing

(Hint: Stop Funding Liberal Corporations and Start Buying Products and Services from Companies that share our values!)

Read on:

Our friend, Brian Camenker of www.massresistance.com, from Massachusetts listened to the entire SB 296 Senate hearing online.  He asked me if the sponsors were Democrats.  I said, “No – they are REPUBLICANS!”  He was stunned because the sponsors were giving a completely liberal message and brought in very liberal experts to testify – just as the Democrats of Massachusetts do!

Those of us who oppose this legislation waited our turn to speak patiently.  The committee chair, Curt Bramble, allowed a 60-minute filibuster for proponents to speak.  That left us only one minute and with such short notice – NO experts available to testify.

Expert witnesses from the pro-LGBT side were lined up representing pro-gay corporations eBay and Adobe both touting how important this bill is for their companies and that in order for them to stay in Utah this was a necessary step.  The Adobe representative shared that before it came to Utah, its leadership told Utah marketers that this issue would need to be resolved.

Apparently Governor Herbert, who has spent an inordinate amount of time in Silicon Valley California to market Utah as the “next Silicon Valley” to companies who find California an unfriendly place economically for business is luring them to Utah and has assured them that Utah would become an LGBT-friendly state.

Another witness from Illinois testified for a long time and has apparently been very involved in crafting Utah’s bill and promoted it as “the national model” they are going to take state by state.

When I saw the Adobe building going up at the “Point of the Mountain” in Utah County, I predicted that it would change the face of the conservative cultural environment.  We are now seeing this happen.  Pay attention, Utahns.

This is all about money and profit.  As Christians we are told that where our treasure is, there shall our heart be also.  Do we so easily sell our values for money?  Apparently so in Utah.

That is why American Leadership Fund is joining with companies that stand strong on principle and religious values and that show great American Leadership.  We urge you to support these products and services and to help us develop a coalition of consumers that will keep our country under God.

They are:

EOS Mobile

Medical Cost Sharing

Please mention American Leadership Fund when you call.

We appreciate donations of any amount – you can text ALF to 313131 or click on the donate tab on this site.

 

HB 322 – Religious Liberty and Nondiscrimination Protection – L Christensen. Please support this bill as opposed to SB 296 – Antidiscrimination and Religious Liberty Amendments – Urquhart HB 322 protects individual religious liberty, SB 296 does NOT! SB 296 is  mis-named.  It is NOT a religious liberty bill because it does not protect people […]

Read More

Why the New “Gender Identity” Bill Must Be Stopped

1 1 Comment

As you know, the Utah Legislature is now nearing the end of the session – one week to go.

A brand new GENDER IDENTITY bill came out Wednesday, March 4, 2015 that redefines SEX and does NOT protect individual religious liberty – SB 296 (Urquhart-Adams) VOTE NO!

This bill is fast-tracked for a hearing as the first item on the agenda at 8 AM Thursday, March 5, 2015.

ACTION
Please contact ALL Senators immediately. Ask them to VOTE NO on SB 296: Antidiscrimination and Religous Liberty Amendments (Urquhart-Adams).

Talking Points
This bill has several flaws:

1. We need more time to review and inform voters and others who will be affected negatively by this legislation.

For a bill that demands “fairness,” what kind of fairness is there in a thirty-five page bill that dramatically changes the definition of sex to “gender identity” – the first time ever in Utah history – and that has been given less than 24 hours to to review?

In less than 24 hours, we have not had time to bring in expert witnesses from Johns Hopkins University, Harvard and Los Angeles – all who were willing to be there to testify.

We have barely had time to get the information to those reading this blog post in time to respond for the scheduled 8 AM hearing.

This is not what we expect from our Utah legislators. This is what happens only in Washington DC, right? Wrong. It’s happening now, right here in UTAH!

2. This bill protects institutions, associations and affiliates, but it leaves you and me – the individual religious adherent vulnerable and “under the bus.”

This is unacceptable. Another bill in the House, HB 322, sponsored by Representative LaVar Christensen and by your colleague Senator Al Jackson in the Senate, has the proper balance and DOES protect individuals. We cannot pass SB 296 without removing this flaw.

The easier and more logical solution is to support HB 322 – Religious Liberty and Nondiscrimination Protections when it comes to the Senate.

3.Lines 105-109, page 4: SB 296 uses the DSM-5 definition of “gender identity.” This is the very organization that is trying to shut down therapists and counselors and doctors around the country who desire to help their clients based on their religious beliefs, and we should trust that source to protect our First Amendment liberties?

Even at BYU, the APA accredits the psychology department. The chairman told me that they cannot teach the students any form of therapy that would involve religious teachings if the program is to stay accredited.

In California, it is now against the law for parents to take their minor children who are confused about their sex or struggling with homosexuality to a counselor for help. These therapists are now in the Courts fighting for their First Amendment rights. I serve on their national task force and am following this disturbing trend closely.

Where is the fairness or protection to them in this bill?

In addition, putting this DSM definition into this bill removes not only fairness from the medical field, it ignores the integrity of medical science and ignores the conflict that exists between medical doctors and the DSM.

Solid medical science has proven DNA, which defines whether a person is a male or a female. While surgery can alter physical body parts, it cannot alter DNA. A person is born either male or female.

Yet Utah legislators are about to consider a proposal that undermines the integrity of medical science without hearing from respected doctors who disagree with that definition and who have longitudinal studies they have not been given time to present.

Putting this language into Utah law will leave the therapist or doctor on staff at a hospital unprotected and at risk of discrimination should they are forced to provide services they do not believe in religiously or ethically, as is already happening in California under similar laws.

4. Lines 681-685, P. 23: This bill appears to require employers to provide bathrooms, locker rooms and shower facilities specifically for the transgendered. Yet the bill has no fiscal note attached. We have no idea what the cost to taxpayers or employers will be, let alone how companies may have to increase their prices to the consumer to accommodate yet another building regulation. There has been no time to get this information to businesses that may be adversely affected.

For this reason alone, we ask for committee members – at the very least – to send SB 296 back to the Rules Committee for analysis.

As you know, the Utah Legislature is now nearing the end of the session – one week to go. A brand new GENDER IDENTITY bill came out Wednesday, March 4, 2015 that redefines SEX and does NOT protect individual religious liberty – SB 296 (Urquhart-Adams) VOTE NO! This bill is fast-tracked for a hearing as […]

Read More

Who’s Who in the Legislature: Utah’s Constitutional Republic Election System

0 No Comments

American Leadership FundI’ve written several articles addressing the attack on Utah’s Constitutional Republic election system – called the “caucus convention.”

In 2014 the Utah Legislature voted to intervene in the affairs of a private corporation specifically to dictate to it how it will elect its corporate members and who they can be – similar to a corporate board.  Except, what the legislature said was that Macy’s no longer has the exclusive right to appoint or elect its leadership, its CEO and board and voting shareholders.  Instead Gimble’s now has the right to take over Macy’s and petition to manipulate a hostile takeover of Macy’s.

Put another way, should a state legislature have the right to intervene in the business affairs of another private corporation – The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and tell it – by law – how it can appoint or elect its Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and who will be the next President of that church?

Outrageous you say?

Well, that is what the Count My Vote campaign is asking and that is what Senator Curt Bramble and others who are catering to the elite in Utah have done.

Corporate law prohibits such interference from competition in this manner.  (Unless you are General Motors and President Obama.  You may recall how the president stripped franchise owners of their own private contracts.  In Utah those car dealership owners stood at a press conference and, some very tearfully having lost their entire life’s investment in one letter, rightfully described it as communism.)

This matter of a political party’s right to a caucus convention was also challenged in Idaho and was found to be unconstitutional under the First Amendment protection to freely assemble.

Perhaps some of Utah’s legislators did not realize what they were doing at the time, but at this juncture they should be aware of the troubling circumstances they have complicated further.

In fact, it could be said that they acted in contempt of the very party that elected them.  And they continue to do so in this session.

Senator Curt Bramble is at the center of this conflict.  He was the sponsor of SB 54, promoted as the “fix.” He promised that it was “severable,” meaning a portion of the bill could be separated from the rest and dealt with.  However, members of the State Central Committee knew otherwise.  Read former legislator Chris Herrod’s expose here.

Now Senator Bramble tells the Republican Party it’s not severable.  In any other circumstance, this would either be incompetence or obfuscation.  In either case, Senator Bramble and those that followed him in support of SB 54 must be held accountable.

The elite of Utah are behind this attempt to destroy the Republican Party and to infringe on the rights of a private corporation so that they can not only elect their wealthy and famous friends, but also limit it to those that can afford the costly primaries that the media buyers otherwise miss out on with a caucus – convention.

The Republican Party has rightfully filed a lawsuit to defend its first amendment rights.  The Constitution Party has joined the lawsuit with identical concerns.  They should know.  Their party carries the namesake of the very law that is being torn to shreds by Utah Republicans the people elected to the state legislature.

They are also being lied to by local media, especially, but not limited to, Doug Wright.  He also should be held accountable.

Every business owner should be shuddering at the precedent the Utah legislature has created should SB 54 stand.  It means that independents (primarily progressives and Democrats that find it advantageous to run as “independent” or “non-partisan” so they can be elected in a predominantly Republican state) can enter a Republican primary and win it.

The Democrat Party should also be shaking in its boots.  In areas such as Salt Lake City, it would not take much for Republicans to run and take over precincts that the democrats hold by simply usurping the Democrat Party imprimatur.   It removes the same First Amendment rights from the Democrat Party as it does the Constitution, the Libertarian or the Republican Party.

The fundamental questions are:  does a private organization have a right to self-determination and definition?

Does a political party have the inherent and God-given right to declare its beliefs and who will represent them?

The answer is yes.

I am a member of the Utah Republican State Central Committee.  Senator Bramble and others who followed his lead were led down a dangerous path of brambles.  The following Republicans from the 2014 legislative session, knowingly – or otherwise deceived – have done serious harm to the Republican Party and to each of us who have been duly elected to represent its best interests.  We have spent countless hours and sacrifice from our families and work raising funds and defending the interests of the grassroots against an small elite group of people who wish to manipulate with their money or fame:

Utah Senators

Adams, J. S. Bramble, C. Christensen, A. Davis, G. Dayton, M.
Escamilla, L. Harper, W. Henderson, D. Hinkins, D. Jenkins, S.
Knudson, P. Mayne, K. Niederhauser, W. Okerlund, R. Osmond, A.
Stephenson, H. Thatcher, D. Urquhart, S. Valentine, J. Van Tassell, K.
Vickers, E. Weiler, T.

Utah House of Representatives

Anderson, Jerry Arent, P. Bird, J. Brown, M. Chavez-Houck, R.
Christensen, L. Cosgrove, T. Dee, B. Draxler, J. Duckworth, S.
Dunnigan, J. Edwards, R. Eliason, S. Fisher, Janice Froerer, G.
Greenwood, R. Hall, C. Handy, S. Hemingway, L. Hughes, G.
Ipson, D. King, B. S. Last, B. Layton, D. Lifferth, D.
Lockhart, R. McCay, D. McIff, K. McKell, M. Menlove, R.
Moss, C. Nelson, M. Nielson, J. Peterson, J. Peterson, V.
Poulson, M. Powell, K. Romero, A. Sagers, D. Sanpei, D.
Seelig, J. Snow, V. L. Spendlove, R. Stratton, K. Tanner, E.
Webb, R. C. Westwood, J. Wiley, L. Wilson, B

In the 2015 session, the following Republicans were true to the oath they swore to support and defend the U.S. Constitution and the Constitution of Utah.  Most of them became aware of the constitutional matter which had not been presented to them in 2014 and they voted for a bill that would have helped the Republican Party, SB 43 and they deserve our thanks.  This is actually representative of a core group of Utah Senators that primarily vote with a constitutional compass.

Christensen, A. Dayton, M. Henderson, D. Jackson, A. Jenkins, S.
Madsen, M. Millner, A. Stephenson, H. Thatcher, D.

The following Republicans, although they have voted constitutionally on other measures,  have acted in this instance to harm the Republican Party and the interests of the people against the elite.  Perhaps some of them simply trusted their leaders or were pressured to do so?

Adams, J. S. Bramble, C. Dabakis, J. Davis, G. Escamilla, L.
Harper, W. Hillyard, L. Iwamoto, J. Knudson, P. Mayne, K.
Niederhauser, W. Okerlund, R. Osmond, A. Shiozawa, B. Stevenson, J.
Urquhart, S. Van Tassell, K. Vickers, E. Weiler, T.

Congratulations to Chris Herrod and Craig Frank and their www.UnConventionConservative.com blog site, and others who have worked very hard to get the truth to Senator Bramble’s colleagues and for their integrity in stopping SB 254, the SB 54 highway that circled around CMV City in this 2015 session.  Here are the Senators that voted to HOLD the bill in committee.  We appreciate them for their diligence.

Dayton, M.
Hillyard, L.
Hinkins, D.
Jackson, A.
Thatcher, D.

Here are some talking points in favor of the caucus system and why so many of the grassroots that understand its benefits are concerned about:

Many have asked about the specific objections the Party has to SB 54 (the Utah Legislature/Count My Vote compromise). Please see eight major objections below – (for the sake of brevity, preserving our constitutional rights is a given):

1)     The SB 54 compromise allows candidates who are not Republicans to run on the ballot as Republicans.

2)     It allows a candidate to be on the Republican primary ballot without having to get one Republican signature.

3)     It allows someone to win a Republican primary with as little as 10 percent of the vote, because there is no majority vote requirement.

4)     It forces the Utah Republican Party to have all 29 county conventions in a two week period

5)     It does not allow the Republican Party to ensure that candidates running on the Republican primary ballot even acknowledge that they support the Republican Party’s platform.

6)     Count My Vote has never been about increasing voter participation. It has always been about finding another and easier way to gain access to the Republican Party brand, and they are using the appeal of increasing voter participation as the rallying cry to do it.

7)     We have one state convention in 2015 to make all the required changes to comply with the aggressive 2016 timeline.

8)     If we can’t comply with the SB 54 requirements in time, Republicans may not be on the ballot in 2016.

We need your support today to continue in this fight.  Please consider a donation of whatever amount you are able – $10. $25, $50, $100 or more – a monthly donation is also welcome.  Simply text “ALF” to 313131 or

Donate_Now

I’ve written several articles addressing the attack on Utah’s Constitutional Republic election system – called the “caucus convention.” In 2014 the Utah Legislature voted to intervene in the affairs of a private corporation specifically to dictate to it how it will elect its corporate members and who they can be – similar to a corporate […]

Read More