Category Archives: News

News

Left-wing hate group faces numerous claims of sexual harassment, gender discrimination and racism

5 Comments
The Southern Poverty Law Center was connected to a 2012 domestic terrorism attack
The Southern Poverty Law Center was connected to a 2012 domestic terrorism attack on a Washington think tank

You might remember how gay activist Floyd Lee Corkins II used the Southern Poverty Law Center’s “hate map” to plan and execute a mass shooting domestic terrorism attack against the Family Research Council office in 2012. But just recently, the SPLC has run into major, major problems.

Let’s start with a summary from the Washington Examiner of what the SPLC has done:

In 2015, the discredited organization was forced to apologize to renowned neurosurgeon and now Housing and Urban Development Secretary Dr. Ben Carson for including him in its “Extremist Files” a year earlier.

Two years before that, an attempted mass murderer had stormed into the Washington, D.C., headquarters of the Family Research Council, a conservative group maligned by the SPLC with its “hate group” label, carrying a firearm and 15 Chick-fil-A sandwiches. His goal was to kill as many FRC employees as possible and smear their faces with the sandwiches. He told the FBI that his choice of target had been inspired by SPLC’s designation of FRC as a “hate group.”

[…]Across the hall from FRC at the time was the headquarters of Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal advocate that has since also landed on the SPLC’s “hate group” list for our work litigating religious freedom, life, and marriage and family issues. We were given this designation by the SPLC even as we were earning nine victories at the U.S. Supreme Court since 2011.

Even after the SPLC was connected to domestic terrorism, (Corkins was convicted of domestic terrorism), the SPLC refused to remove the FRC, a respected socially conservative think tank, from their “hate map”. Isn’t that ironic? The group that inspired a hate crime refuses to stop hating the victim of the hate crime.

But there is some good news. Senator Tom Cotton (R. – AR) has noticed the claims against the SPLC, and he’s going to do something about it.

PJ Media reports:

On Tuesday, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) sent a letter to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) demanding an investigation into whether or not the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) should lose its tax-exempt status. His letter comes after weeks of turmoil with the SPLC struggling with scandals of alleged racism and sexism. The organization fired its co-founder, saw its president and other leaders resign, and lost a prominent member of its board.

“I am writing to urge you to investigate whether the Southern Poverty Law Center should retain its classification as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization,” Cotton begins his letter. “Recent news reports have confirmed the long-established fact that the SPLC regularly engages in defamation of its political opponents. In fact, the SPLC’s defining characteristic is to fundraise off of defamation.”

Cotton notes that “the SPLC has accrued more than $500 million in assets. According to the group’s most recent financial statement, it holds $121 million offshore in non-U.S. equity funds. The SPLC uses these assets to pay its executives lavish salaries far higher than the comparable household average.”

[…]”Based on these reports, and in the interest of protecting taxpayer dollars from a racist and sexist slush fund devoted to defamation, I believe that the SPLC’s conduct warrants a serious and thorough investigation,” Cotton writes.

But wait! There’s more good news:

Last December, Baltimore lawyer Glen Keith Allen filed a mammoth lawsuit against the far-left smear factory. Among other things, he alleged that the SPLC’s penchant for attacking “far-right groups” and primarily Republicans constituted a violation of the rules for 501(c)(3) status. Tax-exempt groups under this status cannot engage in political campaigning.

[…]In 2017, the charity navigation website GuideStar marked each organization on the SPLC list as a “hate group” on its website. Liberty Counsel filed a lawsuit. Shortly thereafter, the Christian nonprofit D. James Kennedy Ministries filed a lawsuit against Amazon and the SPLC, after realizing that it was excluded from Amazon Smile over the SPLC list.

Huge technology corporations like Facebook, Amazon, Google, YouTube, Twitter and PayPal all parter with the SPLC hate group. I wonder how the people who work for these companies feel about their “business partner” now, after all of these claims of sexual harassment, gender discrimination, and racism have come out. By the way, Amazon removed the Alliance Defending Freedom from their Amazon Smile program as well.

If these companies are actively promoting the Democrat Party and their allies through their business practices, maybe it would be a good idea for the government to investigate them, too?

News

Democrat presidential candidates propose giving citizenship to millions of illegal immigrants

5 Comments
Net annual cost of illegal immigration
Net annual cost of illegal immigration to taxpayers

The Democrat position on border security, as we know from that last few months, is that they would prefer that the government be shut down rather than build a wall. One Democrat presidential candidate even wants to give millions more illegal immigrants amnesty. Is there any reason why American taxpayers should be concerned about his plan?

The radically leftist Dallas Morning News reports:

Democratic presidential hopeful Julián Castro on Tuesday unveiled a detailed immigration plan that would offer a path to citizenship for millions of immigrants in the country without authorization.

He’s not the only one.

Fox News reports that Robert O’Rourke proposes something similar:

Days after saying he’d support eliminating U.S.-Mexico border barriers, former U.S. Rep. Beto O’Rourke has released a 10-point plan that argues that strict border enforcement encourages illegal immigration and that calls for giving millions of undocumented immigrants a path to citizenship.

[…]During an interview with MSNBC host Chris Hayes, O’Rourke said he would take down the wall between the U.S. and Mexico. Along the nearly 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border, there are about 700 miles of fencing.

Byron York writes in the Washington Examiner that the Border Patrol numbers show there is a crisis at the Southern border. Basically, since the Democrats and the courts have blocked Trump’s attempts to secure the border and deport illegal aliens. Things are a lot worse at the border than they used to be, even under previous administrations.

Byron writes:

In a matter of months, migrants knew Trump could not stop them from entering the country illegally — and staying.

It should surprise no one that the numbers headed up again, to 396,579 in 2018. Now, crossings have gone through the roof, with 76,103 apprehensions in February of 2019 and 100,000-plus in March, numbers that could have come from the early- and mid-2000s.

And the numbers do not tell the whole story. In the Clinton-Bush years, the overwhelming number of illegal crossers were single, adult men trying to avoid detection as they sneaked across the border. When caught, they were quickly returned. So when 1.2 million were caught crossing, that did not mean that 1.2 million stayed in the United States.

Now, however, the nature of the flow has changed. Today, the large majority of those caught crossing are families and unaccompanied children. They are not trying to sneak in, they are crossing for the purpose of giving themselves over to the Border Patrol. They do that knowing U.S. law forbids them being returned, or separated, or even held for more than a few days. In short order, they are released into the United States.

It seems safe to say that more illegal crossers are staying in the U.S. than in the days of Clinton and Bush.

Well, that’s not good.

I thought it would be useful to highlight a couple of stories about law-abiding Americans who have been affected by all of this “compassion” from the Democrat party and their allies on the courts.

Here’s one from CBS News Louisiana:

Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry has announced the arrest of an undocumented immigrant accused of more than 100 counts of sex crimes.

Miguel Martinez, 44, was arrested on 100 counts of possession of pornography involving juveniles under the age of 13 years old, one count of production under the age of 13, and one count of sexual battery of a juvenile under the age of 13.

[…]Martinez was previously deported in 2005.

He is a registered sex offender in California, Landry said.

Previously deported, and a registered sex offender. I don’t think that we should elect a Democrat to give him citizenship.

Here’s one from NewJersey.com:

The man charged with raping and strangling a jogger in Jersey City’s Lincoln Park had already been deported twice, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials said.

Jorge Rios, who was identified by ICE officials as Jorge Alberto Rios-Doblado, is from Honduras and “has been removed from the country on two prior occasions, in 2003 and 2004,” according to ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operation (ICE-ERO) in Newark. ICE officials also said Rios initially entered the country illegally.

He was deported before? Maybe we should have some sort of deterrent to keep out repeat offenders, like a wall or something?

Look, we have procedures for bringing in skilled immigrants. We should bring in immigrants using those procedures. If people want to come across our border illegally, they should be deported. We shouldn’t elect someone who wants to take down border walls and give people who broke the law to come here a path to citizenship.

News

What is the best introductory book about pro-life apologetics?

1 Comment
I'm Scheming Unborn Baby, and I approve this decision
I’m Scheming Unborn Baby, and I approve this message

Do you like to argue about controversial things? Of course you do. And so does Scheming Unborn Baby, (pictured above). But have you schemed as much as Scheming Unborn Baby does before he gets into controversial discussions?

Here’s an excellent book review of the best pro-life book for ordinary people. It’s written by famous pro-life debater Scott Klusendorf from the Life Training Institute.

Excerpt:

The Case for Life by Scott Klusendorf is an absolutely outstanding defense of the pro-life position with regard to the abortion debate. Being familiar with Scott’s work through Stand to Reason I was looking forward to this book with much anticipation. Scott is one of the most able, articulate, persuasive, and winsome pro-life speakers in the country and his book does not fail to deliver.

He’s got chapter-by-chapter breakdowns, so let’s look at some of them:

In chapter five Scott addresses the nature of truth and the topic of moral relativism, a view of morality our culture is saturated with to the core. Addressing this topic becomes absolutely necessary given its prevalence and the fact that often the claims of pro-lifers are misunderstood. This is seen in such cliches as “Don’t like abortion? Don’t have one!” or “I’m personally opposed to abortion but I think it should remain legal.” In short, pro-lifers are not making subjective preference claims when they say abortion is morally wrong but rather objective truth claims. Scott lays out some fundamental problems with moral relativism as well as a brief history outlining the move from moral realism to moral non-realism.

In chapter six Scott exposes the myth of moral neutrality. Both sides of the abortion debate have views they want to legislate and it is impossible for the state to remain neutral. However, it is often pro-lifers who are accused of trying to “legislate morality” while pro-abortion choice advocates get a free pass. In short, pro-lifers are dismissed as “religious” because of an unwillingness by pro-abortion choice advocates to address the issues. This is intellectually dishonest. How bout we stick with science?

And more:

In chapters ten through fifteen Scott addresses some of the most common arguments put forth by pro-abortion choice advocates. These include “Women will die from illegal abortions,” “You shouldn’t force your view on others,” “Pro-lifers should broaden their focus,” “Rape justifies abortion,” “Men can’t get pregnant,” and “It’s my body, I’ll decide.” The fundamental problem with most of these objections is that they beg the question. They assume the unborn is not a human person.

One more chapter – I’ve never seen chapters like this before:

In chapter sixteen Scott outlines four essential tasks that pastors concerned with biblical truth need to accomplish:

First, Christian pastors need to emphasize a biblical view of human value and ensure their congregation understands that abortion unjustly takes the life of an innocent human being. Second, they need to equip their congregation with pro-life apologetics so they can compete in the marketplace of ideas. Third, they need to emphasize the healing power of the gospel of Jesus Christ and preach repentance and forgiveness for post-abortion men and women. Finally, Christian pastors need to overcome their fear that abortion is a distraction, their fear of driving people away who might otherwise hear the gospel, and their fear of offending people with abortion-related content.

If you want to see Scott speak, here’s a new-ish 42-minute lecture:

If you like that, consider getting the book. Scheming Unborn Baby recommends it, and so do I.