Posts Tagged ‘LGBT’


I am imagining that Hillary Clinton is spending a great deal of time with close advisors and political strategists this week.  She has been a very good soldier for Barack Obama for four years now.  But there is no way that Hillary Clinton is going to allow her own presidential ambitions for 2016 to be spoiled so that Barack Obama can be re-elected in 2012.
An inevitable gunfight has been building between the Chicago Democratic machine and the Arkansas Democratic royalty for weeks now.  And President Obama can thank his short-sighted Vice President for expediting the inevitable shootout to begin at the same time as early voting.
President Obama has escaped disaster time after time with scandals and cover-ups that would have taken down the cleanest Republican president.  The abuse of the National Labor Relations Board in an attempt to force Boeing to place its 787 plant in union-controlled Washington State left no chinks in Obama’s armor.  Bribing Lockheed Martin with covering of legal expenses if they will postpone required layoff notices until after the election does not seem to have raised a single liberal eyebrow.  Even invoking Executive Privilege to withhold information from Congress regarding the murders of an American Border Patrol and hundreds of Mexican citizens has not shaken the President’s loyal following.
But while the yellow-tinted, main-stream media is blatantly positioned on the side of the Democratic Party, they did not count on having to choose sides between Barack and Hillary in the final days of the 2012 presidential election.
It all started innocently enough.  The President and his Secretary of State set out on an international tour beginning in 2010, sharing enlightened American liberalism to a welcoming world.  Cultures who once hated America would naturally embrace the new oneness with a Presidential bow.
The State Department’s mission now includes promoting the agenda of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) community worldwide.  Or, as Secretary Clinton put it, “So here at the State Department, we will continue to advance a comprehensive human rights agenda that includes the elimination of violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. We are elevating our human rights dialogues with other governments and conducting public diplomacy to protect the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons.” (See http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2010/06/143517.htm)
We could certainly expect that asserting the LGBT acceptance message to other cultures, especially to muslim countries, would be the Obama Administration’sdaisy in the gun barrel milestone.  To quote Secretary Clinton’s closing line in her address calling on every State Department bureau and every embassy to participate in the advancing of worldwide LGBT tolerance, this is “one of history’s great moments.”
Even Hollywood’s international ambassador, Madonna, did her part in carrying out the mission on an informal basis this summer.  Last month, while entertaining a crowd in Washington, D.C., the pop star included this supportive mention of the President’s program, “Y’all better vote for f_ _ _ _ _ g Obama, OK?  For better or for worse, alright?  We have a black muslim in the White House.  Now that is some s _ _ t.  Some amazing s _ _ t.  It means there is hope in this country.  And Obama is fighting for gay rights.  OK?  So support the man, G_ _ _ _ _ mit!”  This heartwarming message was delivered to an American audience shortly after returning to the U.S. from her tour in two decidedly Islamic countries, where she treated her muslim audience to a flash of her right mammilla during a concert in Istanbul.
After softening up the militantly modest sensibilities of Islam’s religious police through messaging, supported by Madonna’s indecent exposure tour, the Obama Administration got down to some thoughtful personnel deployments.  In an apparent act of altruistic hope and change, the State Department dispatched a gay man as Ambassador to Libya.  What could possibly go wrong?
The murder of Christopher Stevens and three other Americans took place just three months after Stevens arrived as America’s Ambassador to Libya.  In response to this horrific act, the Obama Administration and Clinton State Department jointly concluded that Libyans must simply have become impulsively emotional over a YouTube video called The Innocence of Muslims (see the trailer HERE).  After all, it was produced by a Coptic Christian who lives in California, USA.
Now here’s where the story gets weird.  The Obama Administration went all-in with the YouTube video as the sole impulse for Ambassador Stevens’ death.  They dispatched Susan Rice, America’s Ambassador to the United Nations, on a persuasion tour across television talk shows to convince U.S. citizens that an offensive video was the Libyan Ambassador’s actual cause of death.  The President himself even asserted the story on David Letterman’s nighttime show.  Every other spokesperson for the Administration stuck to the script.
The State Department even created a television ad (linked HERE) to calm down Muslims who may be prone to violence as a result of the YouTube video.  They paid Pakistani television outlets $70,000 to play the ad, which features both President Obama at the White House and Secretary Clinton saying, “Let me state very clearly that the United States has absolutely nothing to do with this video.  We absolutely reject its contents.  America’s commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation.”  One week later, the Coptic Christian filmmaker was arrested in California.
Obama’s Deputy Campaign Manager Stephanie Cutter struggled awkwardly in a live interview with Brett Baier to defend the Obama Administration’s storytelling.  Once off-air, she cried, “Help me, Brett.  I’m too pretty to be a Democratic Party hack.  I should be a Fox News girl!”  (OK; That last part is not true.)
But Congress has called on State Department personnel to testify under oath about the Libyan embassy attack.  And nothing from testimony is consistent with the Obama Administration’s contention that the murders were a spontaneous mob response to an amateur video.  Nor does the State Department support Vice President Biden’s debate claim (repeated by White House Press Secretary Jay Carney) that the lack of security personnel was due to funding cuts implemented by Congressman Paul Ryan “for the wealthiest 2%.”
The Obama-Biden team seems very willing to let Hillary Clinton become the scapegoat for their poor handling of foreign affairs and for covering up the real story of a loyal American left shamefully vulnerable by a president who blows off intelligence briefings daily.  Secretary Clinton will not take the fall for this president.  And if Bill Clinton chooses to weigh in on behalf of his wife this month, Mitt Romney will walk across the finish line on November 6.  In the worst timing for an administration up for re-election, a dithering media may actually choose to investigate the truth – out of not knowing what else to do.

Mark Baisley

Mark Baisley is CEO of Slipglass, a cyber security product and services firm.


A rumor has slowly been leaking out this week that Chick-Fil-A – arguably the biggest corporate champion for traditional marriage in our society  – has caved to pressure from the pro-homosexual agenda.

It’s been reported by several sources that Chick-Fil-A will no longer support pro-family organizations like Focus on the Family and the National Organization for Marriage. According to the Washington Post, “Chick-fil-A stopped funding traditional-marriage groups in an effort to open a new Chicago restaurant, but the company initially kept quiet about the decision, prompting gay rights groups to speculate that the company feared a backlash from conservative customers.”

The news came after a press release by “The Civil Rights Agenda,” which stated that, “The Civil Rights Agenda, Illinois’ leading lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) civil rights advocacy organization, has learned that Alderman Moreno has finalized his negotiations with Chick-Fil-A.  Alderman Moreno has confirmed that Chick-fil-A will no longer give money to anti-gay organizations and that they have clarified in an internal document that the company will treat every person equally, regardless of sexual orientation.”

According to Fox News, “The company declined to comment beyond a statement saying it planned ‘to leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government and political arena.

Anti-gay groups listed as recipients of funds in the past declined to comment.”

The Civil Rights Agenda also quoted a portion of the letter from Chick-Fil-A to Alderman Moreno, a Chicago official who refused to allow Chick-Fil-A to open a restaurant in his city.

The letter stated, “The WinShape Foundations is now taking a much closer look at the organizations it considers helping, and in that process will remain true to its stated philosophy of not supporting organizations with political agendas.”

The WinShape Foundation is a charity founded and sponsored by Chick-Fil-A.

Those are the facts that have been released so far, and any news at the time of this writing is sourced by the Civil Rights Agenda Press Release and not by Chick-Fil-A itself.

Of course, traditional marriage proponents like ourselves and Chick-Fil-A CEO Dan Cathy do not consider ourselves or Focus on the Family or the National Organization for Marriage or any other organizations that Chick-Fil-A may have donated to, to be anti-anything, but rather pro-traditional marriage. Also, as far as we’ve heard, Chick-Fil-A continues to serve chicken to  anyone who pays for it, equally, regardless of sexual “orientation.”

That is why, before hastening to condemn Chick-Fil-A, our ministry will wait to hear from Chick-Fil-A that they are changing their policy on who they donate to, or to see if they cease their support for some of these pro-family ministries.

ADA has received our share of politically worded responses from companies in the past, and the quoted portions of Chick-Fil-A’s letter to Alderman Moreno smacks of one of those letters.

A betrayal of that sort by Chick-Fil-A would be especially hurtful after the restaurants’ clients turned out to support the company with their biggest day of sales ever after Dan Cathy made his comments supporting traditional marriage.

While we are not prepared to condemn Chick-Fil-A at this point, we do encourage you to write them in support of the pro-traditional marriage stance that they’ve held in the past and stay tuned to how this plays out.

TAKE ACTION: Kindly encourage Chick-fil-A and its Chief Operating Officer, Dan Cathy, to stand strong and NOT cave in to the radical Homosexual Lobby and liberal politicians by dropping its laudable support for pro-family and pro-real-marriage (one-man, one-woman) groups:

Chick-fil-A phone: 404-765-8000[you will reach a receptionist, who will then put you on hold to talk with a Chick-fil-A representative; also don’t forget to thank Dan Cathy for his public defense of godly values!]

Chick-fil-A online contactform: http://www.chick-fil-a.com/Connect/Contact-Us-CARES.

Chick-fil-A Corp. headquarters: 5200 Buffington Road, Atlanta, GA 30349

Also, encourage Chick-fil-A’s charitable foundation, WinShape Foudation, to NOT succumb to pro-homosexual intimidation and continue to support pro-family and pro-real-marriage organizations:

WinShape Foundation P.O. Box 490009 Mt. Berry, GA 30149-0009 Phone:  877-977-3873; E-mail: info@winshape.org

For further information: A special appreciation to Peter LaBarbera and Americans for Truth About Homosexuality.  You would do well to read his article from minutes ago. http://americansfortruth.com/2012/09/20/encourage-chick-fil-a-not-to-cave-in-to-gay-activists-by-dropping-marriage-support/

http://www.americandecency.org/full_article.php?article_no=1395


 

In the guise of a 30 minute sitcom, last night “The New Normal” delivered a pulpit-pounding sermon taken straight from the LGBT doctrine of the gay agenda.
“The New Normal,” a new show on NBC, centers on two homosexual men who want to have a baby; a young woman, “Goldie,” the surrogate carrying a baby for them; Goldie’s 9 year-old daughter; and Goldie’s conservative, Christian, bigoted, racist, grandmother.
The premise of the show is to demonstrate how loving and enlightened the gay couple is and how mean-spirited, intolerant, and hate-filled are those who oppose the legitimization of homosexuality and the gay agenda.
Advertisers include: JC Penney, Best Buy, Burlington Coat Factory, Air Wick, Allegra D, and returning advertisers include Campbell’s Soup/V-8, Arby’s, American Express, and Kia.
These four repeat offenders have advertised on all three episodes of “The New Normal.” In addition to their soup products, Campell’s soup has advertised some of their other products, including V-8 juice and Pepperidge Farms snacks.
Click here to send a message to the sponsors empowering this offensive show.
The show seems to relish portraying Nana, the homophobic conservative Christian grandmother not only as a bigot, but also as a hypocrite to her own beliefs. In the first episode she made reference to wishing she had aborted her own daughter –“I thought your mother was a fibroid tumor, and by the time I figured it out, she had a face, and I was screwed.”
In this episode she catches her 9 year old great-granddaughter kissing a 4th grade boy and takes both children to Planned Parenthood to get condoms for the boy and birth control pills for the 9 year old girl.
However, depicting conservatives as intolerant hypocrites is only the first point in NBC’s sermon. Point #2 gives the message that those who hold a view of homosexuality as an immoral lifestyle are therefore bigots who hate homosexuals.
Interspersed with the lovey-dovey scenes of gay men kissing and referring to each other as “honey,” viewers are taught that those who object to such displays are hate-mongers.
When Bryan and David, the gay couple, are kissing in a clothing store, they are confronted by another male shopper, who is with his wife and young daughter.
The shopper tells the kissing homosexual couple:
“Would you mind not doing that in front of my daughter – kissing another man.   … This is a family store and I shouldn’t have to go home and explain that to my kid.” … “Look, I don’t care what kind of crap you do in the privacy of your own home, but don’t bring it in here.”
Bryan: “Explain what, sir? Love?”   … Thanks for your intolerance and your bigotry and for fostering this ignorance in another generation.”
Shopper: “I’m trying to protect my family, here.”
Bryan: Well, we’re having a family, too.”
Shopper: “Well, that’s disgusting. I feel sorry for that poor kid.”
This scene is played out portraying the traditional family as mean-spirited and intolerant, while the gay couple is shown as the victims of bigotry and hate. As Bryan’s eyes fill with tears, he sobbingly exclaims: “How are we going to protect our child from hate?”
Later Goldie, their sweetly-portrayed surrogate, comes to their defense, stating: “If only these ignorant people with all this hate in their hearts could see you like I do.”
Our faith teaches that certain lifestyles, practices, and behavior are morally wrong – i.e. immoral – which infuriates those in the entertainment industry who want their lifestyle validated. Hollywood cannot tolerate traditional, Christian values which truthfully labels such lifestyles as sinful, and so in the most blatant example of bigotry, shows such as “The New Normal” portrays Christians and conservatives as the intolerant ones because we won’t put a stamp of approval upon behavior that God calls “debased.”
The entertainment industry is a mighty force in shaping the views of millions of Americans, but “might” doesn’t make right. And while they will continue to try to tell us that immorality is “the new normal” we will continue to stand for the changeless Truth of God’s Word which will stand for all time.
Defend truth by sending a message to the corporations empowering the false teaching of “The New Normal.”Click here to send your letter now.

For most Americans, the meaning of marriage is simply common sense. Marriage as the union of one man and one woman is at the heart of what most of us believe family should be. Even if we don’t all manage to live out that belief as perfectly as we would like, not everyone who opposes the redefinition of marriage to include homosexual couples has a detailed explanation for their position. Just because someone is divorced, for example, does not mean he or she does not believe in traditional marriage. Everyday folks understand that society needs strong ideals to bring out the best in imperfect people.

When I ask regular people why they are not comfortable with calling homosexual relationships “marriage,” I find it has nothing to do with fear or hatred. Although homosexual marriage advocates constantly slander the rest of us as irrational, hateful bigots, most people’s objections are quite sensible. When average people look at the facts, they are concerned with the “new reality” that legally sanctioned homosexual “marriage” will undermine the moral instruction of their children. They do not want schools teaching their children ideas about homosexuality that will disrespect their religious convictions. They are also concerned that if we “loosen” the definition of marriage once, we may do it again. Almost no one is comfortable with legalized polygamy, for example, but if marriage no longer means one man and one woman, what’s to say it won’t mean three or four people? Would such a trend be modernity or cultural degradation?

Such objections are always dismissed by Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) activists as ignorant fear mongering. They scold us for being stupid and reassure us that all they want is the right to love whomever they choose. As homosexual marriage advocate Jonathan Rauch put it to NPR, “We are not asking, [as] gay marriage advocates, for the right to marry everybody or anybody, just to marry somebody.” What could sound more innocent? And so concerns about polygamy or school-led indoctrination are mocked as if we are worried about the Boogie Man or a monster under the bed.

But what about the rest of the world? Other countries who have submitted themselves to the wishes of LGBT advocates; where has it led them? Let’s start with Europe. Most LGBT activists praise many European countries for supposedly being “far ahead” of the United States regarding the legal privileges afforded LGBT individuals.Many Scandinavian countries such as Denmark, for example, which was the first country to recognize civil partnerships for same-sex couples in 1989. Many other countries, like Great Britain, have implemented extensive diversity measures praised by LGBT activists worldwide.

So let’s take a quick look at what’s going on in the public schools in the United Kingdom. After fifteen years of service in sex education and other similar non-profits, Simon Blake has been named the chairman of the anti-bullying non-profit Diversity Role Models. The organization conducts workshops in public schools. How does Mr. Blake believe bullying can be ended? He believes that schools will breed bullying and fear unless “gay sexuality becomes visible in schools. We need openness in the playground, in the classroom and in the behaviour of teachers.” (Pink News, UK)

These words speak of a “bridge too far” for the average American family. The purpose of school is not for any group to express or flaunt their sexuality or to create a “New Normal” as is the name of the new Television show. Are we to conclude that as part of a truly successful anti-bullying initiative, school children need to see two boys kissing at school, or two teachers of the same gender in a romantic relationship?

Mr. Blake is giving voice to a viewpoint to which many sensible people are rightly concerned. LGBT activists want to indoctrinate children as early as possible with the idea that their sexual choices are healthy, normal and natural. This is, of course, what they believe. And now in the United Kingdom, school children will have to agree with them, or face accusations of being bullies.

Now let’s take a look southward at Brazil. Despite polls indicating that the majority of Brazilians do not favor legalizing homosexual marriage, the Brazilian Supreme Court ruled to redefine “family” to include homosexual relationships. But that’s not all.  Earlier this year, three people—a man and two women—registered themselves as a “civil union” in Sao Paolo. Yes, you read that correctly. These people, in the eyes of the Brazilian courts, are in a legal, three-person union.

So maybe our concerns aren’t unfounded after all. I believe all human beings bear God’s image, and as such should be treated with respect and dignity. But treating LGBT individuals with respect and dignity does not require us to reorganize society according to their wishes or give them “superior rights” to the rest of us. It does not require us to submit our children for indoctrination about LGBT sexual practices, and it does not require that we make our legal system vulnerable to the slippery slope of eliminating the family altogether.

Harry R. Jackson, Jr.

Bishop Harry Jackson is chairman of the High Impact Leadership Coalition and senior pastor of Hope Christian Church in Beltsville, MD, and co-authored, Personal Faith, Public Policy [FrontLine; March 2008] with Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council.

http://townhall.com/columnists/harryrjacksonjr/2012/09/15/samesex_marriage_still_a_tough_sell/page/full/


An affiliate of NBC in Utah has refused to air “The New Normal,”  a new television show about a single mother’s life as a surrogate for a gay  couple, finding the program “inappropriate” for family viewing.

“After viewing the pilot episode of ‘The New Normal,’ we have made the  decision to keep it off our fall schedule,” said Jeff Simpson, CEO of KSL-TV  parent company Bonneville International. “For our brand, this program simply  feels inappropriate on several dimensions, especially during family viewing  time.”

Simpson has stated that the show has crude dialogue, explicit content and  offensive characterizations, which does not fit with the station’s  family-friendly approach, Deseret News reported.

Still, the CEO refused to criticize NBC for airing the gay-friendly show,  which premiers on ABC on Sept. 11, and has expressed hopes that KSL’s  relationship with the network will not be damaged.

“NBC is a valued partner – and as the Summer Olympic Games prove, they are  committed to great news, sports and entertainment programming. KSL is confident  that with the proliferation of digital media, those who wish to view the program  can easily do so,” Simpson said.

This is not the first time KSL has decided to pass on a sexually provocative  show. Last season, the Utah station turned down the chance to air another NBC  show, “The Playboy Club,” which was about the first-ever Playboy Club in Chicago  in 1961.

GLAAD (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) has blasted the station’s decision, accusing KSL of being “out  of touch” with America and the acceptance homosexuals receive in the wider  society.

“Same-sex families are a beloved part of American television thanks to shows  like ‘Modern Family,’ ‘Glee’ and ‘Grey’s Anatomy.’ While audiences, critics and  advertisers have all supported LGBT stories, KSL is demonstrating how deeply out  of touch it is with the rest of the country,” said Herndon Graddick, GLAAD’s  President.

“We invite Jeff Simpson to sit down with GLAAD and local LGBT families. We  know that if he would, he would see that not only are our families normal, but  by citing ‘crude and rude’ content and refusing to affirm LGBT families, KSL and  Mr. Simpson are sending a dangerous message to Utah. They should make that  right,” Graddick added.

Last month, pro-family group “One Million Mons” encouraged a boycott against  “The New Normal.”

“Millions of Americans strongly believe that marriage should be between one  man and one woman. NBC’s ‘The New Normal’ is attempting to desensitize America  and our children. It is the opposite of how families are designed and created.  You cannot recreate the biological wheel,” the group said last month

http://www.christianpost.com/news/gay-themed-show-the-new-normal-dropped-by-station-over-family-friendly-concerns-80674/#1WuzWDyQmzPI7vOb.99


Are conservative Christians fighters by nature who thrive on the front lines of the culture wars? While there may be some of us who tend to be more confrontational, a recent incident suggests to me that most of us who identify as followers of Jesus are drawn to compassion more than conflict and are given to building friendships more than engaging in fights.

Last week, one of the pastors of my home congregation was informed by the police that there would be a gay protest outside of our church service on Sunday morning. A local gay website carried this announcement: “We will meet just before Service begins, and protest as they gather, we will have a silent protest as service is going and let them have it as they leave for the day. Remember we will be peaceful and respectful, something they don’t understand. We are going to STAND TOGETHER AS A COMMUNITY to show that our love is stronger than their hate.”

In response, I wrote on my blog: “On behalf of FIRE Church, I want to extend to you the warmest welcome and let you know that we are thrilled that you are here with us on Sunday. We have been praying for you for a long time!”

Interestingly, the blog entry, which ran about 325 words, received more hits than any of my previous entries. What made it so attractive?

Scott Volk, the pastor who received the heads-up from the police, posted a gracious invitation to the protesters on the same gay website that announced the event, letting them know they would be welcomed warmly. “In all our years here,” he wrote, “we’ve only desired to reach out with love to everyone in the local community here whether they are labeled as gay or straight. Hopefully, you’ll see that love demonstrated on Sunday as you protest.”

When Sunday morning came, about ten protesters showed up, and they were greeted with water, snacks, and genuine Christian love. Within a few minutes of dialog, they left, telling us we were too nice and loving to deserve a protest. When I posted an announcement on my Facebook page with this update, it received more “Likes” than any other post in memory. What prompted such a positive response?

On Monday, the organizer of the protest called into my radio show to apologize publicly for the protest, explaining that their “anger . . . was aimed [in] the wrong direction.” He continued, “Once we got there Sunday morning we were greeted with absolutely perfect love. I mean, it was fantastic.”

He accepted my invitation to meet him for dinner in the near future, not for the purpose of having a theological argument (I assured him that was not my intent) but to discuss how we could live side by side in the same city with such profound differences dividing us.

On Tuesday, I posted an article in the opinion section of a Christian news site, recounting this narrative and ending with the conviction that it is possible to “reach out and resist,” meaning reaching out to the LGBT community with compassion while resisting the activist agenda with courage. And I quoted Pastor Scott’s invitation to those who doubted his claims to truly love LGBT people to join him and his family for dinner one night. As he wrote, “to call someone hateful without ever meeting them, seeing them, or hearing them speak, is an indication of a heart that needs love. I make myself available.”

The response to my article, which was not triumphant in tone and put an emphasis on Christian grace, was amazing: Within 36 hours of being posted, it had been shared more than 12,000 times, whereas I was told that the average opinion piece there receives about 100 shares.

It looks like a clear pattern had emerged in the responses to my blog, Facebook post, and article. The Christian readers were thrilled to see love in action.

Without a doubt, when we are convinced of the rightness of an issue, as people with strong biblical beliefs, we will take a stand, regardless of cost or consequence. (I know there are cowards and hypocrites among us, but there are plenty of committed Christians who are willing to stand up for what is right, even when it means swimming against the tide and going against the grain.) And there’s no question that some of us are drawn to conflict and controversy.

But for the most part, we would rather be friends than fighters, ambassadors of reconciliation rather than culture warriors. The events of this past week underscore that clearly.

Michael Brown

Michael Brown holds a Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures from New York University and has served as a professor at a number of seminaries. He hosts the nationally syndicated, daily talk radio show, the Line of Fire, and his latest book is The Real Kosher Jesus.

http://townhall.com/columnists/michaelbrown/2012/08/30/christians_would_rather_be_friends_than_fighters/page/full/


What God says about turning our back upon Him AND a few human beings say about our concern regarding trying to live in Christ and under  the principles He gave us to keep us from sin, self and societal destruction.

 

Listen to our one minute contrast between J.C. Penney and Chick-fil-A

First a few verses from God’s Word:

 

Jeremiah 12.17

But if any nation will not listen, then I will utterly pluck it up and destroy it, declares the LORD.”   [My comment:  As you will see, the godless deny His Word and rational thinking as their hearts become hardened to truth.]

Jeremiah 6.16

Thus says the LORD: “Stand by the roads, and look, and ask for the ancient paths, where the good way is; and walk in it, and find rest for your souls. But they said, ‘We will not walk in it.’

 

Jeremiah 9:23,24

Thus says the LORD: “Let not the wise man boast in his wisdom, let not the mighty man boast in his might, let not the rich man boast in his riches, but let him who boasts boast in this, that he understands and knows me, that I am the LORD who practices steadfast love, justice, and righteousness in the earth. For in these things I delight, declares the LORD.”

Here’s what a few humans said about our concern regarding:  J.C. Penney CEO reassurances don’t ring true

Email #1:

There are gay people deal with it. Thanks for letting me know where to shop. JC Penney here I come.

Email #2:

Oh Bill, believe it not, not everyone cares about your phony Christian beliefs. To most rational, grownup people there is no problem with homosexuals, even though you are obviously hung up on them. Many of us are sick to death of your constant stream of lies. You are told the truth but you deny it.

R.M. Virginia Beach VA

Email #3:

Howdy. It appears that someone who thinks they’re clever has signed me up for your anti-GLBT newsletter against my will. I’m largely uninterested in protecting an artificial ideal of “traditional family” that only existed on fictional 50’s TV (the 50s, for real people, was a lot less idyllic). However, I won’t waste both our times shooting holes in your argument (largely because you won’t listen and I don’t know you well enough to take the effort).

Please remove me from your list. And let’s keep it polite and dignified. I won’t call you a frothing bigot, you won’t call me a socialist facist (which would be silly because they’re complete opposites), we both just accept that I was fraudulently signed up for this and that mistake needs correcting.

Have a better one.

– ~~No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message. However, a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced

Email #4:

Poor stupid fool. J.C.Penney does not have any need of racist,bigoted or homophobic customers.You and others of your ilk should go elsewhere. Hell springs to mind.

http://www.americandecency.org/archives/god-and-what-others-say-about-turning-our-back-upon-him/#more-6924