Sen. Hirono Should Step Up for Justice

“Make no mistake, too many women have faced sexual assault without the confidence of due process to come forward. But Sen. Hirono’s rant, essentially condemning the male race as abusers first, disregards the very standards of justice that underpin civility and our freedom.”

I'm delighted that the GOP and conservatives in general are still discrediting, minimizing, demonizing, bullying and slut-shaming the victims of sexual assault a mere 27 years after a misogynist and sexual harasser was confirmed to SCOTUS.

No wonder there's a huge partisan gender gap.

That is the fatal flaw with the social justice narrative, that only results count to remedy grievance. There is no search for truth just a wrong to fix a wrong.

You have it exactly right.  The Senator doesn’t take into account the rights of the accused.  Some on the social justice warrior side are upset that the dept. of education are allowing for the rights of the accused in light of the Duke Lacrosse team case at. Educational institutions.  Also, sorry I missed your seed on a related topic before it was locked.  

"As a woman and as an American,  I’m dismayed by the message Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) delivered this week telling  “men of this country and the men in this committee” to “just shut up and step up” to the allegation of sexual assault from 36 years ago against Judge Brett Kavanaugh."

Well, if you're so dismayed by her message, maybe you should have fucking stepped up already and addressed the HUGE disparity we've had for CENTURIES where the male is believed and the woman is most often dismissed as too "emotional", "frail" or not as "trustworthy" as the males around her. If Mazies message is too harsh for your sensitive wittle ears, maybe you can show her how equal the sexes really are in America with some statistics. Maybe start with male vs female pay which of course is equal, right? Maybe you can start with males vs females in our legislative branch? They make up half of our population, why are they not half of our legislature? Why hasn't there been a female President yet? Are there none that have been worthy of that position? Or is it that men are just so much better at it?

Yes, these "allegations" are just that, unproven allegations. But they are as reliable as any other Americans testimony whether male or female. When Kevin Spacey was accused, with the same amount of proof as the accuser of Brett Kavanaugh, he lost his job as a fake President. Now we are considering giving a lifetime judicial appointment to a person who has been credibly accused of attempted rape to our highest court and anyone who doesn't take the accusation seriously is just a partisan piece of shit who just wants Kavanaugh confirmed for the slight chance he'll push his Christian beliefs into supreme court rulings contrary to the constitution. Those kinds of pieces of shit don't deserve to call themselves patriotic Americans.

But this particular case is not the place to address that issue when it affects the real life events for two living people now.  You don’t get to sacrifice judge Kavanaugh on the alter of past grievances real and imagined.  As the article states “Yes, the #MeToo era has merit, but not at the expense and erosion of the foundations of our democracy.”  

You don’t get to sacrifice judge Kavanaugh on the alter of past grievances real and imagined.

That's why there should be an FBI investigation as the victim has requested, so why is the GOP refusing to allow that and why is Grassley refusing to allow anyone else to testify at the hearing?

You don’t get to sacrifice judge Kavanaugh on the alter of past grievances real and imagined.  As the article states “Yes, the #MeToo era has merit, but not at the expense and erosion of the foundations of our democracy.”  

There are several reasons to move on from Kavanaugh, this is just the latest.

People aren't going to ignore multiple reports without an investigation. 

The problem you have is you say you believe her based ONLY on an anonymous letter written 36 years after the fact where, even in her letter, she does not recall the place, the year, the time, who was there, etc.

I don't think anyone has said they do not want to hear her. Hell the Senate judiciary is bending over backwards to accommodate almost every condition she wants, even going to delay the hearing five times.

Kavanaugh says...I didn't do it and you say...YOU LIE!!!

All emotion...no facts.

Kavanaugh says...I didn't do it and you say...YOU LIE!!! All emotion...no facts.

Where in my comment do I say "You lie!"?

All I suggest is that if, for the last 6,000 years of recorded history, men's word has been given at a minimum twice the weight of a woman's, then doing the reverse for a while can't do any more harm than has already been done.

Sure, you can say "What's done is done, what's in the past is in the past, now we need to make sure we apply proper justice and seek definitive proof before burning a "man" at the proverbial stake" "Two wrongs don't make a right you know..."

And it's true, two wrongs don't make a right, but the way women have been fucked over for the last several thousand years I think they are entitled to be believed whatever the consequences. Now, I don't condone anyone lying, I think every woman should tell the truth about how they've been treated, and that we as a society, in general, believe them unless facts refute their and their friends/witnesses testimonies.

What have men relied on throughout history to have society believe their side of the story and not the woman? Emotion, and the fact they could control the facts, that's what a patriarchy does. You believe what they tell you to believe because that's the way it is and that's the way it shall always be, or so patriarchs will tell you. I'm just suggesting patriarchies are just as worthless as any other type of government that puts all the power in unchecked hands because of some random bias like gender, gender identity, race, height, weight, faith or the lack thereof.

So let's recap what we have here...

On one hand.....One woman makes a claim through an anonymous letter to a Congresswoman then to a Senator. That Senator outs her and the games begin. The claimant says through her "therapist" there were 4 boys in the room but in her letter, she states 2. Within hours of being outed, the claimant has 2 far left wing "lawyers" come out to be her mouthpiece. We have not seen the original letter, we have not seen any video of this claimant in public, with the exception of a grainy picture and another of her holding a "not my President" poster board. She claims she is afraid of flying and wants to drive across country, but there are reports that she is already on the east coast. The demands for her to testify change hour to hour.

The Senate committee has interviewed as many as 6 so called witnesses, where all of them deny any of the claimants claims are true, and one woman who posed on social media that she heard about the party shortly after it happened, then deleted that post when it was whispered to her that, in the claimants original letter, she said that she did not say anything to anyone until at least 2012, 30 years later. That same woman then posted that what she did served her purpose.

On the other hand....Judge Kavanaugh states that he was not at any party the claimant says and that there is no way he did what she is alleging......

But Senator Hirono believes the accuser.

No....not a political stunt at all. s/

But if someone accused her of wrongdoing, she'd deny the accusation, attack her accuser's credibility, refuse to resign and demand the full benefits of due process before being subjected to punishment. Just like anyone would.

There's no doubt that a guilty perp or an innocent party would both deny the allegations, but that's not the issue.   The real question is why are conservatives in general still engaged in a pattern of discrediting, trivializing, demonizing, bullying and slut-shaming the victims of sexual assault a mere 27 years after a misogynist and sexual harasser was confirmed to SCOTUS?

And why don't conservatives understand the consequences of failing to fully and properly investigate the allegations?

And your hard evidence and proof that Justice Thomas did what was alleged is?   The left is simply rehashing that now and with an even more flimsy accusation.  

Hill almost certainly perjured herself at the hearing, or revealed herself to be an idiot.  Besides changing the allegations of what Thomas did over the course of a week, her excuses for why she kept following Thomas from job to job would be tough to believe from a high school dropout, let alone a lawyer with an ivy league education. 

The left doesn't like to talk about that. 

And your hard evidence and proof that Justice Thomas did what was alleged is?

I find Hill's claims not only far more credible than Thomas' denials but there were several other sexual harassment victims who the committee refused to hear, including Angela Wright, Sukari Hardnett and Moira Smith .    There were also quite a few people who corroborated Hill's claims including Thomas' friend Kaye Savage and Marguerite Donnelly and her husband.    Even Thomas' aide Mike Middleton substantiated parts of Hill's claims, as did Thomas' friends when he was at Yale.

thinkprogress

The bigger question is why haven't conservatives evolved at all on this issue in the intervening 27 years?      You don't have to believe the claims made by a victim but the  conservative's habit of discrediting, trivializing, demonizing, bullying and slut-shaming the victims of sexual assault hasn't changed one bit.

Like him rejecting her and marrying a white woman.  That was her trigger against Thomas.  Like then they wait until after the progressive target is seated on the appeals court and wait until he’s being confirmed for the Supreme Court.  

Did you know you are repeating a LIE?  And whether you understand it or not, women go through these harassments throughout their lives to varying degrees.  If you read about Kavanaugh's college days, its clear this behavior would be common, his friend wrote a damn book on it and plenty of things are public.  Things are judged different today than they were even last year (let alone decades ago) and women have finally had enough.  Not our fault if men still don't get it.  My generation didn't do enough in the past, but now the damn has burst and you won't be putting that water back.  If we weren't personally impacted we know plenty of women who were.  The senate better watch themselves.  I think more women are about to be elected.  And being in a currently red district, we are primed to flip, for the first time in like, forever.  For a young woman.

why are conservatives in general still engaged in a pattern of discrediting, trivializing, demonizing, bullying and slut-shaming the victims of sexual assault

I honestly don't know what you're talking about unless those are your words for being reasonably skeptical of one woman's hole-filled story.

And why don't conservatives understand the consequences of failing to fully and properly investigate the allegations?

What would you have them investigate beyond what they are already doing? The accuser has named multiple witnesses and every one of them has submitted a statement to the committee saying they don't remember or categorically deny the events she alleges. Not one person has been able to corroborate her story. There are no more alleged witnesses and no physical evidence is available. All that's left is to hear her testimony and allow the accused to respond.

I believed all of Bill Clinton’s accusers.  I believe the accusers of Ellison.  I believed Al Frankens accusers, and I believed those who accused Harvey Weinstein.  And others.  Do you?  

What would you have them investigate beyond what they are already doing?

The FBI should do what they do best - interview the parties under penalty of law and perform an investigation to find any corroborating evidence or supporting statements from other classmates.

Now that more of Kavanaugh's victims are coming forward they'll either need to do that or withdraw his nomination.    Even then Kavanaugh is screwed if he wants to keep his current job on the federal bench.

Looks like the nation was spared another conservative perv.

The FBI should do what they do best - interview the parties under penalty of law

My understanding is that statements have been submitted to the Senate committee. I would expect that those statements would include a signature declaring that the contents are true under penalty of perjury. I don't know that for sure, but they wouldn't have any value otherwise.

an investigation to find any corroborating evidence

Like what after 35 years? A rumpled bedspread? His fingerprints on her face? I wouldn't count on Instagram being any help.

supporting statements from other classmates

Again, like what? The people she claims as eye witnesses deny her statements. Anything else would be hearsay. Anyone who claimed that they heard her talk about it at the time would make a liar of her because she claims that the first time she told anyone was in therapy in 2012.

Now that more of Kavanaugh's victims are coming forward

I would dispute the assertion that any of them were "victims." They voluntarily got hammered at parties that they knew going in would be raunchy and 35 years later we're supposed to be horrified that something sexually rude happened? Sorry, but even if we take the accusations as true (and I said this days ago about Blasey-Ford), I don't believe for a second that they ever felt victimized until the day before yesterday or thereabouts when they had a chance to get famous. 

I also don't believe that all the people commenting and clutching their pearls have no clue what happens at college parties. I don't yet have a reason to believe that he actually forced himself on anyone in a genuine assault or rape. The stuff I see reported is the common stuff of playful drunk teens.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting all high school or college kids engage in this crap. And I don't personally condone it. I myself went to parties and got really drunk but never quite engaged in this kind of sexual play. But my eyes are open. I know this stuff happens. And if these parties were as notorious as they claim, then these girls went to these parties seeking out exactly what they got. I do not feel the least bit bad for them.

Even then Kavanaugh is screwed if he wants to keep his current job on the federal bench.

He should lose it if he did in fact lie during confirmation.  

But if someone accused her of wrongdoing, she'd deny the accusation, attack her accuser's credibility, refuse to resign and demand the full benefits of due process before being subjected to punishment. Just like anyone would.

Not getting confirmed isn't punishment.  

Not getting confirmed isn't punishment.

Of course it is. Because absent this charge, he would be approved without questioned. Furthermore, he is still a sitting judge on the 1st (D.C.) Circuit. Do you really think he can be declared to be a sexual predator and keep that job?

Good points well said.  These false accusations are threatening to ruin his life.  He and the truth will prevail though.  

Of course it is. Because absent this charge, he would be approved without questioned. Furthermore, he is still a sitting judge on the 1st (D.C.) Circuit. Do you really think he can be declared to be a sexual predator and keep that job?

Only because of partisanship.  There were other instances of him lying to the Senate.  For example, his denial that he didn't knowingly use information stolen from Democrats emails.  

"Furthermore, he is still a sitting judge on the 1st (D.C.) Circuit."

It doesn't bother you that he lied?  He shouldn't be sitting on any court. 

There were other instances of him lying to the Senate

You simply can't prove that. Not even the Senate thinks that.

I sure can prove it. His definitions of boof and devils triangle are demonstrably wrong. He clearly forwarded stolen democratic emails that contained clear indicators that it was not obtained legitimately. 

The whole of senate does not agree with you.  Several senators have stated he lied.  

E.A   So only one side uses " lies " as tools of the trade?

I didn't say that now did I?

Nope I did not. 

I didn't say that now did I? Nope I did not. 

E.A Ok Help me out here then..

 Who if any , used lies for what purpose and what is the " Greater Good "?

Wafting?

LOL Meant to type Waiting, but wafting is more apropos!

Who if any , used lies for what purpose and what is the " Greater Good "?

The greater good is to not have a liar on the supreme court. Especially one who half the country does not want to see on the SCOTUS. 

The greater good is to not have a liar on the supreme court. Especially one who half the country does not want to see on the SCOTUS. 

E.A  ok so now you did use " Liar " we are in agreement to that!

 So tell me what about the Rights of the " Other 50% "?

And then::

Please show me when the " Judge " lied about Not Knowing Ford?

 So tell me what about the Rights of the " Other 50% "?

E.A   All my Studies of the Election reports of the US of A, Show that No one was ever elected that was liked by more then about 32% of the Populace, if any have a different report I would love a Link to it!!

IE: The Person Put forth by either party almost never is unanimous, so that is less then 50% of the Parties supporters.

 No Party has Ever Won with say more then 52% of the Vote , so the Question to be asked is what % of the Citizens VOTE, so see the ?

Please show me when the " Judge " lied about Not Knowing Ford?

Did he claim he didn't know her?  I haven't heard that, so I can't confirm or deny that he lied about that. 

IE: The Person Put forth by either party almost never is unanimous, so that is less then 50% of the Parties supporters.

That is not true when it comes to confirm and consent  Many justices have been confirmed by the whole Senate. 

Did he claim he didn't know her?  I haven't heard that, so I can't confirm or deny that he lied about that. 

E.A My Bad, I thought you said you watched the hearings, I have I am sure you can get the Recordings in many Sites, please watch them and let us know, many thanks!

HINT: The Last Two Hours of the Judges response will do I would think!

That is not true

E.A Please IN Context!

I am talking about Elections for President, not Judges!

But I am willing to Discuss Judges if that is your wish!

True.  Judge Kavanaugh was perfect in his  statement to the senate.  Bravo!  

Did he claim he didn't know her?  I haven't heard that, so I can't confirm or deny that he lied about that. 

E.A  The Part I read that made me think you did watch it

" I take it you didn't watch the hearing yesterday.  Google kavanaughs lies during confirmation. " 

Elections for judges would be a huge mistake in my opinion.  

Elections for judges

E.A According to the " We The People " Document that is the way  for it.

 According to that " Good Book "  there is a different way!

 and Most " Tribal Peoples " Practise that way!

According to the " Evolutionist " it is Survival of the Fittest!

I did watch the vast majority of the hearing. I did not see the end. 

Of course it is. Because absent this charge, he would be approved without questioned. Furthermore, he is still a sitting judge on the 1st (D.C.) Circuit. Do you really think he can be declared to be a sexual predator and keep that job?

I don't think we know that for sure. There was already some softening of support for kavanaugh. 

I don't think one who has lied under oath should be allowed to remain a judge.  Perjury is a felony. 

I did watch the vast majority of the hearing. I did not see the end.

E.A  SO now that you have you seen the part where he said he Never met her? so we have a retraction now?

I too await the retractions of the false accusers.....

She's a menace to the Constitution.

She said today she thinks Kavanaugh's guilty because he's a conservative.  

She unfit to serve on a jury for shoplifting, let alone act as a US Senator. 

What part of Hirono's comments do you disagree with?   Her accurate claim that men comprise the vast majority of sexual assailants or her demand for an FBI investigation?

Read the seeded article written by a woman.  I agree with it in its entirety.  

Read the seeded article written by a woman.

The article doesn't actually say what part of Hirono's comments she disagreed with.   I suspect you didn't even bother to listen to her comments but are just reading about it from a nutty right wing Christian hate group like "Concerned Women For America".......an anti-LGBT hate group which hates gays so much that they even opposed the Violence Against Women Act because it gave LGBT folks some protection from domestic violence.    They're bigoted and superstitious loons and it's rather amusing that you seeded them given the context of rape and sexual assault.

hrc

Concerned women for America is a mainstream conservative women’s rights group, the largest women’s rights group in America.  It’s founder and leader is a fixture in the Republican Party and she regularly advances women’s issues at the GOP convention and at CPAC and the values voters summit among other places.  

Oh boy, that won't go far.  Women today are rejecting that.  They don't like the way the old men in power wield power over the most private personal decisions, from politicians to religions to employers, all have more more input in certain decisions pertaining to women only. They don't accept that old adage 'boys will be boys'.  I'm so proud of them.  It took longer than I expected, but they are stepping up like champions.  Even a conservative woman can't shine that misogynistic gop turd. 

And yet NOW and other progressive women’s groups have shined the turds 💩 of Bill Clinton and countless other Democrat politicians who abused women. Conservative women know this and we know how Hillary Clinton slut shamed all of Bills accusers so that she could ride his coat tails to the Presidency.  Well, fortunately Trump stopped her at the last possible moment.  

Concerned women for America is a mainstream conservative women’s rights group, the largest women’s rights group in America.

LOL.    Perhaps you can explain why they oppose the Violence Against Women Act?   Here are a few hints to get you started:

1.  Concerned Women For America opposed renewing the Violence Against Women Act because it “creates new protections for homosexuals,” despite also claiming that LGBTQ couples were twice as likely to experience domestic violence. Unsurprisingly, they also opposed hate crimes legislation.

CWA Opposed The VAWA In Part Because It “Creates New Protections For Homosexuals.”   According to Right Wing Watch, CWA said in an email, “This legislation, which is normally a boondoggle for feminists groups, has become even more political this Congress. The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), S. 1925, creates new protections for homosexuals. In order to receive federal grants, domestic violence organizations have to agree to embrace the homosexual agenda. It also expands categories of who is eligible to receive services. These broad definitions actually squander the resources for victims of actual violence by failing to properly prioritize and assess victims.” [Right Wing Watch,   4/23/2012 ] 

CWA Said One Reason To Oppose VAWA Was Because It Sought Protections For Sexual Orientation And Gender Identity.   According to the CWA website, “A major problem with VAWA is that it lacks appropriate focus on the real issues at hand. Currently, VAWA has language seeking grant conditions for ‘sexual orientation’ and ‘gender identity’ (Section 3-39). Adding such controversial language to a bill that seeks to protect women diverts focus from victims of violence and bogs it down with partisan political messaging. Dr. Janice Shaw Crouse, senior fellow of Concerned Women for America’s (CWA) Beverly LaHaye Institute, puts it plainly: ‘Decent people are outraged at the abuse of women, but VAWA is more about building feminist power structures than about protecting vulnerable women or addressing the major problems of battered women who end up in hospital emergency rooms.’ [CWFA.org,   2/11/2013 ]

A CWA Spokesperson Said The Violence Against Women Act Represented A ‘War Against Men.’   Janice Crouse wrote in an op-ed for USA Today, “Feminists like to repeat the mantra that there is a ‘war against women,’ but when women can routinely claim nebulous ‘psychological harm’ and keep a man out of his home, away from his children, possibly losing his job and ruining his reputation, there is more of a war against men than against women.” (USA Today,   3/9/12 )

CWA Said The Violence Against Women Act Had Become A “Slush Fund” For Feminist Causes.   According to the New York Times, “For some conservative groups, however, even the core of the nearly 20-year-old [VAWA] law was unacceptable. The Concerned Women for America and Independent Women’s Forum had said the law had devolved into a ‘slush fund’ for feminist causes that harms men unfairly and encourages the dissolution of marriages.” [New York Times,   4/27/2012 ] 

CWA’s Founder Said That Hate Crime Laws Would Infringe Upon The Freedom Of Speech In Churches To Teach The Biblical View Of Homosexuality.   The Associated Press reported, “Beverly LaHaye, founder and president of Concerned Women for America, warns that laws against hate crimes might prevent churches from speaking out against homosexuality. ‘I can see the road signs that…hate-crime laws will one day affect freedom of speech that we have in churches to teach what the Bible says about homosexuality,’ she told a Southern Baptist seminar.” (Associated Press, 3/27/92)

CWA Alleged That Hate Crimes Were Fabricated In Order To Build Momentum For Federal Hate Crimes Legislation.   Concerned Women For America wrote in a press release, “But evidence continues to mount indicating that an alarming percentage of the already small number of ‘hate crimes’ allegedly motivated by sexual preference may have been fabricated by homosexual activists in an attempt to create a political atmosphere ripe for passage of federal ‘hate crimes’ legislation.” (Concerned Women For America, 4/4/07)

CWA Alleged That Hate Crimes Legislation Violated The 14 ^th   Amendment.   Concerned Women for America wrote in a press release, “‘Hate crimes’ legislation flies in the face of the 14th Amendment.  Such legislation would require the government to invest more resources in the investigation and prosecution of crimes against homosexuals than it would the victims at Virginia Tech.  It is an irrefutable fact that H.R. 1592 would treat certain citizens unequally from others.” (Concerned Women for America Press Release, 4/26/07)

A CWA Spokesperson Claimed That Domestic Violence Is Twice As Common Among LGBTQ Couples As It Is Among Heterosexual Couples.   Janice Crouse wrote in a column published on Townhall.com, “Further, the health risks associated with homosexual practice are very real and very much in evidence in the emergency rooms of hospitals. There is no denying: Homosexual sex is dangerous and destructive to the human body. Both HIV and HPV are epidemic among homosexual men. Domestic violence is a common problem twice as prevalent among homosexual couples as in heterosexual ones.” [Townhall.com,   3/9/2010 ]

2. Concerned Women For America does NOT wish you a happy birthday. In fact, they attacked Hallmark for the crime of selling greeting cards celebrating same-sex couples’ weddings.

CWA’s Wright Said “Hallmark Was Jeopardizing Its Brand As A Family-Friendly Company” By Selling Same-Sex Marriage Greeting Cards.   According to Lifesite News, when Hallmark started selling same-sex marriage greeting cards in response to increased demand, “Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women for America, said, ‘Hallmark is jeopardizing its brand as a family-friendly company. Customers used to be able to trust Hallmark to produce quality products that were safe for all ages.  Now parents will need to steer their kids from Hallmark’s section of the greeting card aisle and away from its previously heartwarming movies for fear that they too will push homosexual messages.’” [Lifesite News,   8/22/2008 ]

CWA’s Crouse By Selling Same-Sex Marriage Greeting Cards, Hallmark Was Latching Onto “The Latest Fad Generated By Homosexual Special Interest Groups” And “Negating Its Image As A Wholesome Company”   According to Lifesite News, when Hallmark started selling same-sex marriage greeting cards in response to increased demand, “Janice Crouse, Director and Senior Fellow of CWFA’s Beverly LaHaye Institute, said, ‘By latching onto the latest fad generated by the homosexual special interest groups, Hallmark is negating its image as a wholesome company that promotes American values and pro-family principles in its products.  American businesses have a corporate responsibility to the public that buys their products. Instead of bolstering campaigns by special interest groups like the homosexual activists, corporations like Hallmark should be protecting American culture from those forces that would destroy the family and create a public environment that is detrimental to general well-being, especially children’s well-being.’” [Lifesite News,   8/22/2008 ]

3. CWA said same-sex marriage “is as wrong as giving a man a license to marry his mother or daughter or sister or a group.”

CWA Compared LGBTQ Activity To Incest And Said Same-Sex Marriage “Is As Wrong As Giving A Man A License To Marry His Mother Or Daughter Or Sister Or A Group.”   On CWA’s site, their talking points on “homosexual marriage” state, “Homosexual marriage is as wrong as giving a man a license to marry his mother or daughter or sister or a group.....The assumption by many is that marriage is just two people with a license who have sex and wear rings. Homosexuals do that? Why not give them the license? Engaging in sex doesn’t equal marriage. Adults involved in incest have sex too; should government call it marriage and license them? Certainly not.”  [CWFA.org,   Talking Points, Why Homosexual Marriage Is Wrong ,   9/16/2003 , Accessed 11/3/2014]

CWA’s Matt Barber said, “When Two Men Mimic The Act Of Heterosexual Intercourse With One Another, They Create An Environment, A Biological Counterfeit, Where Disease Can Thrive.”   CWA released a press release on an antibiotic resistant staph infection that was being transmitted by gay men during sex. According to CWA, “Matt Barber, Policy Director for Cultural issues with Concerned Women for America (CWA), said, ‘The medical community has known for years that homosexual conduct, especially among males, creates a breeding ground for often deadly disease.  In recent years we have seen a profound resurgence in cases of HIV/AIDS, syphilis, rectal gonorrhea and many other STDs among those who call themselves 'gay.' The human body is quite callous in how it handles mistreatment and the perversion of its natural functions.  When two men mimic the act of heterosexual intercourse with one another, they create an environment, a biological counterfeit, wherein disease can thrive.  Unnatural behaviors beget natural consequences. In recent years our culture has adopted a laissez faire attitude toward sexual deviancy.  Television shows like Will and Grace glorify the homosexual lifestyle while our children are taught in schools that homosexuality is a perfectly healthy, alternative sexual 'orientation.'  'Stay out of our bedrooms!' we're often commanded by militant 'gay' activists.’” [Concerned Women Of America, Press Release,   1/15/2008 ]

CWA Said Same-Sex Marriage Is A “Conterfeit, A Sham And A Fraud” That Devalues Heterosexual Marriage Because Any Time A Lesser Thing Is Made Equal To A Greater, The Greater Is Devalued.”   According to talking points on their website, CWA says “Licensing the unnatural does not make it natural. It would be a state-sanctioned counterfeit, a sham and a fraud. A licensed electrician cannot produce power by taping two same-sex plugs together. Homosexual sex is dangerous and destructive to the human body and powerless for human reproduction….. The only ‘procreation’ homosexuals can engage in requires that a third party must be brought into the relationship. Granting a marriage license to homosexuals because they engage in sex is as illogical as granting a medical license to a barber because he wears a white coat or a law license to a salesman because he carries a briefcase. Real doctors, lawyers and the public would suffer as a result of licensing the unqualified and granting them rights, benefits and responsibilities as if they were qualified. Homosexual marriage will devalue your marriage. A license to marry is a legal document by which government will treat same-sex marriage as if it were equal to the real thing. A license speaks for the government and will tell society that government says the marriages are equal. Any time a lesser thing is made equal to a greater, the greater is devalued.” [CWFA.org,   Talking Points, Why Homosexual Marriage Is Wrong ,   9/16/2003 , Accessed 11/3/2014] 

CWA Listed One Of Their Concerns “The Disrespect Of Family….The Attempt To Eliminate The Natural Distinctions Between Men And Women.”   On CWA’s web site, in the section on Defense Of Family including CWA’s position that marriage is between a man and a woman, it states under ‘Concerns,’ “The disrespect for family and for the unique contribution of fathers and mothers. The attempt to eliminate natural distinctions between men and women.” Goals included “the respect for the distinctiveness of men and women.” [CWFA.org, Defense Of Family, Accessed   11/13/2014 ]

4. When President Obama condemned Uganda’s draconian legislation criminalizing LGBTQ people, CWA accused the President of practicing “cultural imperialism,” saying “Obama of all people should realize how offensive his position on homosexuality is to devout Muslims.”

CWA’s Crouse Responded To Obama’s Condemning Of Ugandan Bill By Saying Obama “Should Realize How Offensive His Position On Homosexuality Is To Devout Muslims” And That He Was “Forcing The World To Approve And Mainstream Their Homosexuality.”   According to Lifesite news, in response to Obama opposing Ugandan legislation outlawing LGBTQ acts, “Crouse told LifeSiteNews that President Obama's actions are a form of ‘cultural imperialism – exporting the sexual crusade of a very small minority of Americans with outsized influence,’ who have tried ‘to tear down the moral foundations of our nation as well as the rest of the world.’…. ‘Obama of all people should realize how offensive his position on homosexuality is to devout Muslims,’ Dr. Crouse told LifeSiteNews. …. ‘It is unseemly for an American president to dictate to other countries what their cultural, moral and religious traditions ought to be,’ Dr. Crouse told LifeSiteNews. “And it is hypocritical for him on the one hand to say America is unexceptional and bow to other national leaders and then on the other hand, seemingly from a position of moral superiority, tell other nations that their beliefs are inferior to his supposedly enlightened, exalted views. The homosexual activists are not content with acceptance and respect as human beings,’ she said. ‘They, and now our president, are forcing the world to approve and mainstream their homosexuality.’” [Lifesite News,   2/17/2014 ] 

CWA Said Uganda’s “Biblical And Cultural Stand Against The Homosexual Agenda” Was “Courageous.”   CWA introduced a radio segment on Uganda’s anti-LGBTQ legislation by saying “Uganda, the nation that has led the world in the fight against AIDS and HIV infections with its abstinence-based program, is taking on a new challenge. The predominantly Christian nation is taking a biblical and cultural stand against the radical homosexual agenda. Dr. Janice Crouse, Senior Fellow and Director of the Beverly LaHaye Institute, shares more on this courageous action and the impact it will likely have on the sensibilities of some liberal westerners.” [CWFA.org,   Uganda Holding Firm To Biblical Values ,   8/23/2007 ]

CWA’s Crouse Said LGBTQ Activists Were “Imposing Western Ills On A Culture Like Uganda” And That Pushing LGBTQ Rights In Uganda Was “The Worst Kind Of Colonialism.” CWA’s Crouse said in a radio interview, “Specifically, since [Ugandans] have been very clear that it’s their Christian faith that causes them to oppose the homosexuality. They have been very loving, but very firm in saying that homosexuality is condemned in the Bible. They also note that it’s condemned in the Koran and in their laws and in their culture. And if nothing else, they should be able to stand on what is legal and what is cultural about their own country. It’s, I think, the worst kind of colonialism for Western nations to go to a country like that and impose a Western culture on another culture. If we were imposing Christianity there can you imagine the outcry? And yet they think they can go in and impose Western ills on a culture like Uganda. I thank the Lord that we have people in Uganda who are devoted Christians who are willing to go out there at the beginning, at the outset to say you’re not going to change our culture. You’re not going to have influence here. We stand up for what is right, what is legal, and what is part of the culture of Uganda.” [CWFA.org,   Uganda Holding Firm To Biblical Values ,   8/23/2007 , AUDIO] 

CWA’s Crouse Praised Ugandan Activists’ “Refreshing Perspective” And Said That God “Hates The Homosexual Lifestyle.”   According to CWA’s website, in a radio interview, Janice Shaw Crouse said, “So, obviously, the homosexual activists have targeted Uganda to say we’re going to move in there and push for gay rights in Uganda. Well the Christians there have said, ‘oh no you’re not.’ And so this past weekend hundreds of people rallied to protest the recent push by the homosexual activists to get gay rights established in Uganda. They waved banners. They carried signs. They said god loves homosexuals, but he hates homosexuality. And I think that theme really resonates around the world. That God doesn’t hate people. He hates the actions that they commit. And He hates the homosexual lifestyle. So the theme of the rally was a call for action on behalf of the victims of homosexuality. And that too, I think, is a refreshing perspective. That there are people who are victims of homosexuality. And that puts the right kind of label on the homosexual lifestyle. That, it’s the activity, it’s the lifestyle that is contrary to the Bible. It’s the activity that God hates, not the homosexual. And so you have a whole group of people in Uganda who have the first kind of organized activity against homosexual activism in that country.” [CWFA.org,   Uganda Holding Firm To Biblical Values ,   8/23/2007 , AUDIO] 

5. CWA lobbied against anti-bullying legislation because one of its aims was promoting acceptance of LGBTQ people, just another way CWA thinks the “pansexual agenda” is being promoted in schools.

  CWA Said Anti-Bullying Program “Shamelessly Exploits Teen Suicide In Order T0 Create A Climate Of Hysteria” That Silences Belief That “That Homosexual Acts Are Immoral.” According to an Action Alert from CWALAC, “GLSEN’s Day of Silence, which began on college campuses and has now infiltrated even middle schools, exploits anti-bullying sentiment to undermine the belief that homosexual acts are immoral. GLSEN shamelessly exploits teen suicide in order to create a climate of hysteria which they then use to falsely impute culpability for teen suicide to conservative moral beliefs. GLSEN’s end game is the eradication of conservative moral beliefs and the creation of a social and political climate in which it is impossible to express them. Their cultural vehicle of choice for this radical social experiment is public education. What a strategic coup for homosexualists: use our money to capture the hearts and minds of our children.” [CWFA.org,   3/1/2012 ]

CWA Said No “Publicly Subsidized Institution Has The Ethical Right To Teach [children about being LGBTQ] Implicitly Or Explicitly” Because It Is Not Proven That LGBTQ Acts Are “Moral, Good, Or Normative.”   According to their website, CWA said, “The idea that homosexual acts are moral, good, or normative is not a fact. It is an unproven, non-factual, controversial moral belief. As such, no government employee or publicly subsidized institution has the ethical right to teach it to children implicitly or explicitly. It is entirely possible for schools to work toward the important goal of eradicating bullying without affirming homosexuality or gender confusion. It is unconscionable that conservative parents remain silent, acquiescent, fearful non-participants in our public schools while homosexuals and their ideological allies engage continuously in vociferous, vigorous, and bold action.” [CWFA.org,   3/1/2012 ]

CWA Said “Homosexual Activists And Their Allies Are Aggressively Targeting Younger And Younger Children Through ‘Anti-Bullying Laws.’”   According to their website, CWA said “Efforts to exploit public education for the purpose of eradicating conservative moral beliefs are dramatically increasing every year. Homosexual activists and their allies are aggressively targeting younger and younger children through ‘anti-bullying’ laws, policies, and curricula; through the effort to nationalize ‘comprehensive sex ed’; through laws mandating positive portrayals of homosexuality and gender deviance in curricula; and through events like the Day of Silence, National Coming Out Day, Ally Week, Transgender Day of Remembrance; and Spirit Week. And conservatives do virtually nothing. Our complacence makes us complicit in the damage done to our children and our culture. Moreover, we teach our children by example to be cowardly conformists. It’s time to resist and there’s no easier way to resist than to call your children out of school on the Day of Silence.” [CWFA.org,   3/1/2012 ]

A CWA Spokesperson Said That An Anti-Bullying Campaign Was Really A Platform For Liberals To Promote A ‘Pan-Sexual Agenda.’   The Associated Press reported, “Using a young readers' novel called ‘The Misfits’ as its centerpiece, middle schools nationwide will participate in a ‘No Name-Calling Week’ initiative starting Monday. The program, now in its second year, has the backing of groups from the Girl Scouts to Amnesty International but has also drawn complaints that it overemphasizes harassment of gay youths. … ‘I hope schools will realize it's less an exercise in tolerance than a platform for liberal groups to promote their pan-sexual agenda,’ said Robert Knight, director of Concerned Women for America's Culture and Family Institute.” (Associated Press, 1/23/05)

CWA Joined Other Conservative Groups In Opposing Anti-Bullying And Suicide Prevention Programs For Fear Of Promoting Homosexuality.   The Boston Globe reported, “Many of the nation's largest conservative, evangelical, and pro-family organizations-such as the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, and Concerned Women for America - have opposed suicide prevention and antibullying programs intended to protect gay teens because they say such programs promote homosexual activity.” (Boston Globe, 6/12/12)

CWA Issued A Report About Ways To Oppose LGBTQ Groups’ ‘Day Of Silence’ Project.   Concerned Women For America wrote in a press release, “Concerned Women for America's Culture & Family Institute today released a paper, ‘What to Say on the Day of Silence’…outlining caring ways for parents and students to respond to [the] homosexual activist ‘Day of Silence Project’ in schools. The Day of Silence is a thinly disguised pro-homosexual campaign sponsored in part by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), in which students -- prompted by homosexual pressure groups -- take a vow of silence to highlight their alleged oppression.” (Concerned Women For America Press Release, 4/8/03)

CWA Joined Other Conservative Groups In The ‘Day Of Silence Walkout Coalition.’   The Capitol Resource Institute wrote in a press release, “Friday is the Day of Silence, a campaign of the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which is often used to make homosexual behavior appear normal on school campuses. … The Day of Silence Walkout Coalition includes organizations such as Concerned Women for America, Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays, and more.” (Capitol Resource Institute Press Release, 4/13/09) 

A CWA Spokesperson Called For The Immediate Termination Of Kevin Jennings, President Obama’s Assistant Deputy Secretary For The Office Of Safe And Drug-Free Schools. Christian Women For America wrote in a press release, “Dr. Janice Shaw Crouse, Director and Senior Fellow of Concerned Women for America's Beverly LaHaye Institute, wonders, ‘Where is the outrage over Kevin Jennings’ appointment as President Obama's ‘safe schools’ czar?’  She said, ‘Kevin comes from a career of promoting dangerously violent homosexual activities among children in public schools. His life and career are proof that his whole raison d’itre is to promote homosexuality among children and teens. There is something so fundamentally wrong with the President's appointment that parents and all adults who care about children's well-being must demand that Kevin Jennings be fired immediately.’” (Concerned Women For America Press Release, 12/16/09

6. Even though CWA opposed non-discrimination legislation, it’s not because they don’t think discrimination exists. They just think that it’s cultural conservatives who are being discriminated against.

CWA Said Of Starbucks CEO Supporting Marriage Equality, “What’s Next, Starbucks? Two Separate Drinking Fountains For Liberals And Conservatives Or ‘Now Hiring’ Signs Reading ‘Heterosexuals Need Not Apply’?”   According to Right Wing Watch, when Starbucks CEO told Thomas Strobhar of the Corporate and Morality Action Center that he should sell his shares in the company if he is concerned about Starbucks’ endorsement of marriage equality in Washington state, CWA responded “At Starbucks’ annual shareholders meeting, Schultz sent a clear message that he does not want the business of anyone who believes that marriage is a sacred covenant between a man and a woman, pointedly telling one such shareholder, ‘You can sell your shares in Starbucks and buy shares in another company.’ This outburst reportedly came right after Schultz stated he wanted to ‘embrace diversity of all kinds.’ He doesn’t want our business. Schultz statement isn’t tolerant. It is prejudicial and bigoted. So where are the newspaper headlines reading, ‘Starbucks CEO Refuses Pro-Marriage Supporters Service,’ which is exactly the message his statement conveys? What’s next, Starbucks? Two separate drinking fountains for liberals and conservatives or ‘now hiring’ signs reading, ‘Heterosexuals Need Not Apply’?” [Right Wing Watch,   3/26/2013 ] 

CWA Joined Other Conservative Groups In An Organization Called ‘NotMyBathroom’ To Oppose A City Nondiscrimination Ordinance In Montana.   Missoulian reported, “An organization called NotMyBathroom.com announced this week its opposition to a city ordinance that would protect people from discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. … So far, the only other group willing to identify itself as affiliated with NotMyBathroom.com is Concerned Women For America, said Erickson. … Slated for a public hearing April 12, the legislation would ban discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered folks in the areas of employment, housing and public accommodations, such as restaurants and hotels.” (Missoulian, 3/25/10)

The CWA President Lobbied Members Of Congress Not To Sign A Transgender Nondiscrimination Pledge.   Concerned Women For America wrote in a press release, “Concerned Women for America President Sandy Rios told members of Congress in a letter that they would be making a mistake if they sign a ‘transgender’ nondiscrimination pledge, which activists are circulating on Capitol Hill today. ‘By signing this pledge, you would set the stage for being powerless to object when Joe shows up for work dressed as ‘Sally,’ then demands to use the women's bathroom or demands a third set of bathrooms to accommodate him and other ‘Sallys,’ Rios said.” (Concerned Women For America Press Release, 5/19/03) 

CWA Representatives Testified In Support Of Legislation That Allowed Maine Businesses And Schools To Require People To Use Restrooms Coinciding With Biological Gender. The Portland Press Herald reported, “Fredette's measure would allow businesses and schools to require people to use restrooms coinciding with their biological gender, rather than the gender with which they identify. It also would eliminate the ability of transgender people to sue based on discrimination if they are denied use of their preferred restrooms. … The Maine School Management Association testified in support of Fredette's bill, as did representatives from the Christian Civic League and Concerned Women for America in Maine.” (Portland Press Herald, 4/13/11) 

After The Supreme Court Struck Down DOMA, CWA’s Chief Legal Counsel Said That The Ruling Would Lead To Christians’ ‘Imprisonment.’   Janice Crouse wrote in an op-ed for the Washington Times, “Worse, the rulings warn of a future where Christians will have a choice: Keep silent about their faith or face not just being cast as a social pariah, but harsh retribution in the form of fines and imprisonment. It is hard to envision such an outcome, but the pivotal changes and losses of religious freedom and freedom of speech over the past few years portend a bleak future Christians must take seriously.” (Washington Times via Right Wing Watch,   7/2/13 )

CWA Said “Over And Over We See Our Constitutional [Religious Liberty] Rights Trambled In Order To Protect The New Found ‘Homosexual Rights’ And ‘Diversity.’”   According to CWA’s web site, “There are many ‘unintended’ consequences to [nondiscrimination] laws. The most troubling is the inevitable clash between ‘homosexual rights’ and our First Amendment guaranteed religious freedoms. Over and over we see our constitutional rights trampled in order to protect the new found ‘homosexual rights’ and ‘diversity’. President Obama’s own Equal Employment Opportunity Commissioner, Chai Feldblum, a lesbian, has said time and again that she is ‘having a hard time coming up with any case in which religious liberty should win’ over homosexual rights. Christian businesses and charities are being forced to get out of certain states, like the Catholic adoption agencies have had to do in places like Massachusetts and the District of Columbia. Churches are being forced to allow the use of their facilities for homosexual weddings or lose their tax-exempt statuses, such as the case of the Methodist Church’s pavilion in New Jersey.” [CWFA.org,   Big Win For Religious Liberty, The Family In Alaska ,   4/12/2012 ]

CWA Said If Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Same-Sex Marriage In DOMA, Prop 8 Cases, “It Will Leave No Doubt That Christians Will Be Persecuted For Their Beliefs And Accelerate Its Intensity By At Least A Decade.”   According to the CWA web site, in a post before the Supreme Court ruled on DOMA and Prop 8, CWA said, “It might still happen. Even if the Supreme Court does the right thing and refuses to take the bait to force same-sex “marriage” on the nation by judicial fiat in another Roe v. Wade-like decision, the fact is that the number of Christians being punished for their religious beliefs is on the rise. But if the Supreme Court decides to force same-sex “marriage” on the nation when it issues its rulings on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and California’s Proposition 8 this week, it will leave no doubt that Christians will be persecuted for their beliefs, and it will accelerate its intensity by at least a decade.” [CWFA.org,   Will The Supreme Court Give Way To Christian Persecution? ,   6/24/2013 ] 

CWA Said LGBTQ Rights Come “At The Expense Of Religious Freedom In Many Cases.”   According to the CWA web site, “Even liberal activists acknowledge the clash between our constitutionally guaranteed rights to religious liberty and this newly invented ‘right’ to same-sex ‘marriage.’ And they believe ‘gay rights’ should win. Chai Feldblum, the first openly lesbian Commissioner of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, nominated by President Obama for being on the forefront of the ‘gay’ rights movement as a law professor and one of the drafters of the pro-‘gay’ Employment Nondiscrimination Act, has famously said, ‘There can be a conflict between religious liberty and sexual liberty, but in almost all cases the sexual liberty should win because that’s the only way that the dignity of gay people can be affirmed in any realistic manner.’ And affirmed they have been, at the expense of religious freedom in many cases.” [CWFA.org,   Will The Supreme Court Give Way To Christian Persecution? ,   6/24/2013 ] 

CWA Warned If Supreme Court Ruled In Favor Of Same-Sex Marriage, “Christians Will Be Forced To Choose Between Violating Their Religious Beliefs And Earning A Living.” According to a post on CWA’s web site before the Supreme Court ruled on DOMA and Prop 8, “And these examples will grow exponentially if the Supreme Court decides to impose homosexual ‘marriage’ on the country through a judicial decision. Christians will be forced to choose between violating their religious beliefs and earning a living. And Christian organizations will be forced to abandon many good areas of their work as a result of the same-sex ‘marriage’ push. Already, the government is using its force to harass religious organizations in different areas, like adoption and foster care for example. Catholic Charities has been forced out of several places because of their religious beliefs on marriage and the family.” [CWFA.org,   Will The Supreme Court Give Way To Christian Persecution? ,   6/24/2013 ]

7. CWA said Ellen DeGeneres “guides her housewife fans” into rebellion against “God's divine and explicit natural order,” and has also claimed feminism had been “taken over by lesbians.”

CWA’s Crouse Said That Feminism Was Taken Over By Lesbians.   According to an article on Christian Post, ““For many years, both secular and religious feminists operated with the same definition of equality,” says Crouse. “Then somewhere in the last 30 years that changed. Feminism was taken over by lesbians, by those who wanted quotas and abortion on demand.” ….But in a shift that began in the latter part of the 20th century and continuing into the 21st century, many secular feminists saw men as the enemy in a war between the sexes, adding yet another reason for Christian women to disassociate themselves from the movement. ‘We love our husbands, we love our sons, we love our fathers. We appreciate them and value their contributions to our lives,’ says Crouse. ‘We don’t view them as the enemy.’” [Christian Post,   9/8/2011 ]

A CWA Spokesperson Said That Ellen DeGeneres Guides Her ‘Housewife Fans Into Rebellion’ Against God’s ‘Natural Order.’   CWA’s Matt Barber wrote in a column for World Net Daily “I’ll admit it: Ellen is a sympathetic figure with a quick wit. I’m sure she’s a very nice person, and I don’t dislike her at all. But she’s playing with fire. Ellen compounds the sin of homosexuality by using the platform she's been given to lead others astray. She guides her many adoring housewife fans into rebellion against God's divine and explicit natural order by suggesting they celebrate sin and entertain, along with her, the ‘gay marriage’ delusion.” [World Net Daily,   6/5/2008 ]

CWA’s Website Claimed That A Girl Scouts National Convention Would Feature ‘Pro-Abortion, Pro-Lesbian’ Speakers.   The New York Observer reported, “The Web site of another hard-line conservative group, Concerned Women for America, drew its readers' attention to a forthcoming Girl Scouts national convention that, it was alleged, would ‘feature pro-abortion, pro-lesbian speakers.’” (New York Observer, 9/12/05) 

CWA Opposed An ‘American Girl’ Campaign, Saying It Supported The ‘Pro-Abortion, Pro-Lesbian’ Agenda.   The Telegram and Gazette reported, “The protest is directed toward an ongoing American Girl campaign… The ‘I Can’ campaign is geared toward three special Girls Inc. programs building skills in science and math, developing leadership skills, and encouraging athleticism and team spirit. … Concerned Women for America says sales of the ‘I Can’ bracelet support the ‘pro-abortion, pro-lesbian agenda’ of Girls Inc. Groups are planning demonstrations outside American Girl stores, and some Catholic schools and churches have canceled American Girl fashion shows.” (Telegram and Gazette, 11/8/05)

8. CWA opposed the hugely successful repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" because allowing gay, lesbian, and bisexual service members to serve openly and honestly was "radical San Francisco style experimentation."

CWA Opposed The Military Readiness Enhancement Act Which Allowed Service Members To Serve Openly, Accusing The Bill Of “Radical San Francisco Style Social Experimentation.”   According to an action alert from CWA, “At 2:00 pm today, Representative Marty Meehan (D-Massachusetts) will hold a press conference to tout the reintroduction of his Military Readiness Enhancement Act, which would repeal the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. According to an article in The Politico, this bill is among the homosexual activist Human Rights Campaign's three political priorities for the 110th Congress and with the Democrats in control of Congress, it could be considered. During the War in Iraq, our military has other concerns and its attention should not be refocused. It is alarming that our elected officials would seek to conduct radical San Francisco style social experimentation within the ranks of our military during a time of war.” [Concerned Women For America Legislative Action Committee, Action Alert,   2/8/2007 ] 

CWA Opposed Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Because Heterosexuals Forced To Cohabitate With Fellow LGBTQ Soldiers Would Face “Undue Sexual Tension.”   According to fact card put out by CWA explaining their opposition to repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, “Allowing open homosexuals to serve in the military will be destructive to good order and discipline. –Heterosexuals would be in forced cohabitation with open homosexuals 24/7 on all military bases and ships, an arrangement placing undue sexual tension on men and women serving far from home in high-pressure jobs. –Inappropriate actions common among open homosexuals would have to be permitted in all military communities.” [CWFA.org, Gays In The Military Fact Card, Accessed   11/17/2014 ] 

CWA Opposed Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Because Soldiers Who Opposed Would Be Referred To A Bigoted And Service Members Would Be Subjected To Diversity Trainings. According to fact card put out by CWA explaining their opposition to repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, “Service members would be subjected to routine “diversity” training to enforce this new paradigm, and failure to comply would result in career-ending loss of promotions.–Forced acceptance of homosexuality under the civil rights model would place service members with strong religious convictions in direct conflict with military policy.–Service members expressing any concern about homosexuality or a homosexual service member would be referred to as bigoted, homophobic, or intolerant and could face charges for sexual harassment or bullying.” [CWFA.org, Gays In The Military Fact Card, Accessed   11/17/2014 ]

CWA Opposed Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Because It Increases The Chances Of Superiors Taking Advantage Of Subordinates.   According to fact card put out by CWA explaining their opposition to repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, “allowing open homosexuals in the military increases the chances that superiors will take advantage of subordinates—a fact that is documented and one of the factors leading to the passage of the 1993 law.” [CWFA.org, Gays In The Military Fact Card, Accessed   11/17/2014 ]

CWA Joined Other Conservative Groups And Republican House Members In Opposing President Clinton’s ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Compromise Plan On LGBTQ Soldiers.   The Orlando Sentinel reported, “Rep. Cliff Stearns…denounced Clinton's proposal at a news conference attended by three other Republican House members and leaders of groups ranging from the Retired Officers Association to Concerned Women for America. Their opposition Wednesday included fears that allowing overt homosexuality in the military would destroy discipline and pose problems from the foxhole to the dance hall.” (Orlando Sentinel, 1/29/93)

CWA Misquoted Colin Powell In A Full-Page Advertisement Opposing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ In USA Today.   The Dallas Morning News reported, “Gen. Colin Powell has disassociated himself from a full-page ad…in USA Today that urged readers to express opposition to gays in the military.  …[T]he chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said he was never contacted by Concerned Women for America, which paid for the ad that ran April 9. ‘I have never made the statement that allowing homosexuals in the armed forces would destroy the military,’ Gen. Powell wrote.  ‘To the contrary, I stated that I have never been of the view that allowing homosexuals in the military would break the armed forces of the United States.’” (Dallas Morning News, 4/18/93)

 

After A Federal Judge In California Ruled That The Military’s Ban On LGBTQ Soldiers Was Unconstitutional, CWA Said That The Decision Should Be Made By Congress And The Military.   Concerned Women For America wrote in a press release, “A federal judge in California has ruled that the military's ban on homosexuals openly serving in the military is unconstitutional. Penny Nance, CEO of Concerned Women for America said, ‘It should not be activist judges who determine what is best for our troops. This judge's ruling shows a blatant disregard for Congress and the military. It should only be at the discretion of Congress and those in military positions who are trained and competent to decide what is in the best interest of the military and what regulations are best for the readiness of our troops.’” (Concerned Women For America Press Release, 9/10/10) 

9. CWA Said that same-sex foster parters were using children like “guinea pigs” and have fought against LGBTQ parents receiving custody of their children. They even said Mary Cheney’s decision to have a baby with her partner “injured the child” and was “unconscionable.”

CWA’s Crouse Said Same-Sex Households Are Not As Good For Child-Rearing As Heterosexual Households And That Same-Sex Foster Parents Were Using Children Like “Guinea Pigs.”   According to One News Now, “A spokesperson for Concerned Women for America doesn't agree with a bill under consideration in the Senate that encourages adoption agencies to permit LGBTQ couples to adopt children.….‘Something around 65,000 adopted children and 14,000 foster children live in homes that are headed by non-heterosexuals, and yet the data very overwhelmingly says these homes are not as good for children,’ Crouse notes. ‘They don’t even come close to being as good for children as a married couple — mom and dad — family.’ And she suggests the measure is not so much about the children as it is about advancing the homosexual agenda. ‘That agenda is being advanced at the expense of our children and at the expense of the future of our country,’ Crouse said. ‘When you have children who are being used as guinea pigs like this, it’s totally unwarranted.’”  [One News Now,   11/1/2011 ] 

Using Quotes From The Bible And ‘Expert’ Testimony, CWA Lawyers Defended A Mother Who Hid Her Son From His Gay Father For 19 Months.   The Los Angeles Times reported, “Lawyers for Betty Lou Batey, the fundamentalist Christian who hid her young son from his homosexual father for 19 months, asked a San Diego County Superior Court judge Monday to let them argue that Batey's actions were justified to protect the boy from drugs, sex and violence. …[T]he attorney supplied for Batey by Concerned Women for America…quoted the Bible and presented testimony from purported experts on homosexuality to justify the San Diego woman's actions.” (Los Angeles Times, 5/12/87)

CWA’s Founder Praised A Virginia Judge’s Ruling That A Lesbian, By Definition, Is Unfit For Motherhood.   USA Today reported, “A Virginia judge's ruling that a lesbian, as a rule, is an unfit mother stirred the praise of conservatives and the outrage of gay activists Wednesday. Said Beverly LaHaye, director of Concerned Women for America: ‘I'm pleased to see courts finally looking out for the child.’” (USA Today, 9/9/93)

CWA Joined Other Groups In Presenting ‘The Iowa Pledge’ To Republican Presidential Candidates, Which Included Opposition To Gays And Lesbians Adopting.    The San Francisco Chronicle reported, “…Forbes and three other Republican candidates…signed the Iowa Pledge, a public statement of principles sponsored by far-right organizations including the Coral Ridge Ministries and Concerned Women for America. In the pledge, Forbes, Gary Bauer, Orrin Hatch and Alan Keyes committed themselves to opposing same-sex marriage, gays and lesbians adopting or foster parenting…” (San Francisco Chronicle, 1/25/00)

CWA Filed An Amicus Curiae With The New Jersey Supreme Court, Unsuccessfully Opposing Visitation Rights For Both Members of A Same-Sex Couple After Their Breakup. The Times reported, “Significantly expanding the parental rights of gay and lesbian people in New Jersey, the State Supreme Court ruled today that a lesbian who had helped raise her former partner's twins deserved visitation rights after the couple's breakup. … The court disregarded a group called Concerned Women for America, which warned in a friend-of-the-court brief against a heavy judicial hand favoring the homosexual agenda.” (New York Times,   4/7/00 )

A CWA Spokesperson Said That Mary Cheney’s Plan To Have A Baby With Her Female Partner Was ‘Unconscionable’ And That She ‘Injured The Child.’   The New York Daily News reported, “The White House says Cheney's openly gay daughter and top political adviser, Mary, is expecting a baby this spring with her lover of 15 years, Heather Poe. … Janice Crouse of Concerned Women for America…branded the Cheney pregnancy ‘unconscionable.’ ‘She has not only injured her child, she has destroyed the work her father has done. She has acted in a way that denies everything that the Bush administration has worked for. She's essentially saying: ‘In your face,’ Crouse said.” (New York Daily News, 12/7/06) 

CWA Joined Other Conservative Groups To Provide Legal Aid In A Case To Void Child Visitation Rights For One Member Of A Lesbian Couple.   The Associated Press reported, “The Virginia Supreme Court heard conflicting views Thursday on whether the state's ban on gay marriages and civil unions essentially voids a Vermont court's child visitation order in a dispute between two former lesbian partners. The justices are reviewing a Virginia Court of Appeals ruling that Vermont has sole jurisdiction in the visitation battle between Lisa Miller of Winchester, Va., and Janet Jenkins of Fair Haven, Vt. … Miller's lead attorney is the founder of the conservative Liberty Counsel and dean of the law school at the Rev. Jerry Falwell's Liberty University. The Family Foundation of Virginia and Concerned Women for America also have taken up Miller's cause.” (Associated Press, 4/17/08) 

CWA’s President Said That A Study Showing That Children Can Be Healthily Raised By Two Lesbian Mothers ‘Defied Common Sense And Reality.’   The Chicago Tribune reported, “The study, released this month in the journal Pediatrics, found that children raised by two lesbian mothers scored higher on psychological measures of self-esteem and confidence, performed better academically and had fewer behavioral problems than kids with heterosexual parents. … Concerned Women for America grew immediately concerned: ‘You have to be a little suspicious of any study that says children being raised by same-sex couples do better or have superior outcomes to children raised with a mother and father,’ Wendy Wright, the group's president, told CNN. ‘It just defies common sense and reality.’” (Chicago Tribune, 6/29/10)

A CWA Spokesperson Said That Placing A Child In The Home Of A Same-Sex Couple Would Be To Treat The Child Like A ‘Guinea Pig.’   The Baltimore Sun reported, “Janice Crouse of Laurel, a senior fellow at the Beverly LaHaye Institute, the think tank for the socially conservative organization Concerned Women for America, agreed. ‘We don't want to use our children as guinea pigs by arbitrarily ... placing them in homes with two moms or two dads.’” (Baltimore Sun, 11/13/11)

10. CWA thinks protecting transgender employees and students from discrimination and respecting their gender identity opens the door to “predators and pedophiles” and endangers women and children.

CWA Opposed California’s AB 1266, Saying Teens Would “Game The Law” Because Gender Identity Is Based On Feelings And Perceptions.   CWA posted information about California’s AB 1266, which would allow students to use showers, restrooms, and locker rooms that conform to their gender identity as part of the ‘Privacy For All Students’ coalition. According to the document, “There are many problems with the legislation. First, it's an invasion of student privacy to open sensitive school facilities such as showers, restrooms and locker rooms to students of the opposite sex. Further, the legislation is poorly drafted and flawed, a one-size-fits-all approach that contains no standards, guidelines or rules. The law does not require that a student have ever demonstrated any indication that he she or considers himself or herself as transgendered. A student can assert a gender identity at school at any time. Because gender identity is based on feelings and perceptions, he or she can be both transgender and heterosexual at the same time. Because of the lack of requirements, some teens and young adults will undoubtedly game the law. Additionally, the law contains no provisions to balance the interests of all students, including those who are transgender. Finally, it is so poorly conceived and drafted that it may result in harming those it intends to help. For example, it contains no provisions for parental involvement to help design an approach to accommodate the specific needs of a transgender student, and it may jeopardize existing local programs that provide less invasive approaches, such as access to single-stall gender-neutral restrooms, private changing areas, and use of faculty restroom facilities.” [CWFA.org, Privacy For All Students,   Frequently Asked Questions About The AB 1266 Referendum,   Accessed   11/17/2014 ] 

CWA Said Of Transgender Miss Universe Contestant: “Now Young Women Can’t Even Look To Beauty Queens Anymore Without Wondering If They Are, In Fact, Actually Women. ” In a post of Concerned Women For America’s website on the defense of beauty pagents, Chelsen Vicari wrote, “What’s more, who can forget the transgendered contestant allowed to compete in the Miss Universe pageant? Now young women can’t even look to beauty queens anymore without wondering if they are, in fact, actually women.” [CWFA.org,   Tale of the Beauty Pagents ,   6/8/2012 ] 

CWA Complained That “ENDA Would Ensure The ‘Right’ For The Transgendered Acitivists To Engage In Dress And Behavior That Is The Opposite To Their Sex As A Man Or A Woman.”   According to an article on CWA’s website explaining their ENDA opposition, “Probably the most contentious aspect of this very controversial bill is the special protection that it provides not just for “sexual orientation,” but also for “gender identity” which means that employers would have to hire transgendered persons, whether transvestites (cross dressers) or transsexuals, and would have to put up with whatever attire or behavior the employee chooses for the workplace. ENDA would ensure the “right” for the transgendered activists to engage in dress and behavior that is the opposite to their sex as a man or a woman, including their right to use the bathrooms, locker rooms, or showers of the opposite sex.” [CWFA.org,   It’s Time To End ENDA ,   11/8/2013 ] 

CWA Said That Gender Identity Protections Allowing Trans Persons To Use The Restroom Of Their Choice Allowed For “The Potential For Predators And Pedophiles.”   According to CWA’s web site, “We are already seeing a push for unisex bathrooms and the so-called “right” of transgendered persons to use the restroom of their choice — even in the public schools. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued a new federal policy in 2010 that added “sexual orientation” and gender identity nondiscrimination wording to their employment policies for “potential employees,” a term that is left vague and nonspecific so that anyone can have access to any restroom. Such policies are already in effect in a dozen states, allowing for the potential for predators and pedophiles, an explosive problem just waiting to happen.” [CWFA.org,   It’s Time To End ENDA ,   11/8/2013 ]

CWA Warned Of OPM’s Nondiscrimination Policy That “A Man Could Simply Say He Is Expressing His Feminine Side That Day, And Would Be Allowed In The [Women’s] Restroom. Who Could Stop Him?”   CWA said on their web site, “Ladies, imagine at your local Social Security office and have to use the restroom. While youre there, a transgender male (a gender-confused person who could be a transvestite, transsexual, or cross-dresser) decides to apply for a Social Security position. After asking for an employment form, he decides to go to the restroom. Under new federal policies issued by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), both of you would be allowed to use the same bathroom. OPM recently added sexual orientation and gender identity non-discrimination wording to their employment policies for potential employees….. Anyone could be a potential employee, therefore, any man would be allowed in any restroom in federal buildings. A man could simply say he is expressing his feminine side that day, and would be allowed in the restroom. Who could stop him?” [CWFA.org,   Social Security Shocker: Men In Women’s Bathrooms? ,   4/5/2010 ] 

CWA Said ENDA’s Passage Would Mean Christian Businessmen Would Have To Allow A Trans Employee To “Wear Male Clothes One Day And Female Clothes The Next.” According to CWA’s web site, “If ENDA (H.R. 3017/S. 1584) is signed into law, the circumstances described above will be possible in any public restroom in the country. Religious exemptions may be allowed for churches; however, Christians who own day care businesses, bookstores, restaurants, etc., must follow the federal law. Christian businessmen will be forced to adjust their requirements of personal behavior, and dress codes could be a thing of the past. How could an employer demand one employee to dress appropriately, and yet allow a transgendered employee wear male clothes one day and female clothes the next?” [CWFA.org,   Social Security Shocker: Men In Women’s Bathrooms? ,   4/5/2010 ]

CWA Said “ENDA Could Open Bathroom Doors For Predators Throughout The Nation.”   According to the CWA website, “ENDA could also open bathroom doors for predators throughout the nation. In a survey of bathroom attacks by this writer, the following headlines show the already harsh reality of attacks by men in womens bathrooms: X Child molested in Homestead Winn-Dixie bathroom, X Attack in bathroom brings hospital security at MCG under fire, X Father of girl raped in Holland outlet mall bathroom is waiting for justice to be done, X Woman raped in department store bathroom….As a nation, are we willing to extend politically correct protection to an infinitesimally small segment of the population X while endangering the safety of women and children?” [CWFA.org,   Social Security Shocker: Men In Women’s Bathrooms? ,   4/5/2010 ]

CWA Opposed Maryland’s SB 212, Which Would Prohibit Gender Identity Discrimination, Saying It Endangers Women And Children.   According to CWA, “The Maryland legislature recently passed SB 212, deceptively named the “Fairness For All Marylanders Act,” which would require, in part, that businesses open their public facilities (bathrooms, shower rooms, locker rooms, etc.) to allow men to use the ladies’ room and women to use the men’s room, if they self-proclaim to be of the other gender. The bill does this by prohibiting discrimination based on ‘gender identity.’ This bill endangers the privacy and safety rights of all Marylanders, especially our women and children. As Delegate Neil Parrott stated on the House floor, ‘Your right to swing your arm ends where my nose begins.’ This bill tries to provide special rights to ‘transgendered’ individuals, while ignoring the reasonable concerns of husbands and parents.” [CWFA.org,   Urgent Call To Action For Marylanders- Protect Women And Children ,   5/8/2014 ]

CWA Said “Each Person Is Born With A Specific Biological Sex That, Regardless Of Personal, Emotional, Or Psychological Feelings To The Contrary, Is Maintained Throughout Their Lives.”   On their website, CWA says, “Each person is born with a specific biological sex that, regardless of personal, emotional, or psychological feelings to the contrary, is maintained throughout their lives. There is a reason that bathrooms are separated and should continue to be. Men and women are physically different in ways that are traditionally held as private. Most humans neither want to reveal nor see intimate aspects of strangers of the opposite sex. We need to protect our families by stopping the ‘bathroom bill.’” [CWFA.org,   Urgent Call To Action For Marylanders- Protect Women And Children ,   5/8/2014 ] 

I agree with and stand by CWA proudly and in full on each and every thing you listed above.  They are right in every single one of those instances.  They are a Christian and conservative women’s rights group and they are consistent in that.  

They are right in every single one of those instances.

They certainly revealed themselves to be a bunch of dumb bigots who run an anti-LGBT hate group.

Moreover they proved that they don't actually give a crap about the safety of women or any victims of domestic violence or sexual assaults.    What's far more important to them is their hatred of LGBT folks.     Good thing they've lost on each and every one of their issues.

And yet NOW and other progressive women’s groups have shined the turds 💩 of Bill Clinton and countless other Democrat politicians who abused women. Conservative women know this and we know how Hillary Clinton slut shamed all of Bills accusers so that she could ride his coat tails to the Presidency.  Well, fortunately Trump stopped her at the last possible moment.  

And there it is.  You believe women who came out against Clinton, but refuse to give the women who reported abuse by Trump and now 3 with accusations toward Kavanaugh.  Kavanaugh and other Republcans suggested that Ford is either lying or confused.

What is the difference between her accusations and those who accused Clinton? 

Opposition to homosexual marriage, changing ones birth gender, and abortion does not make either Concerned Women For America or Alliance Defending Freedom or any other social conservative group a hate group.  

It's makes them anti-constitution and unamerican.

No, the only people who are anti constitutional and UN American are those that call those who disagree with them haters, questionable, or pseudoscience or go along with those who do so.  

Do you believe Muslim Ellison’s accusers?  

Do you believe Muslim Ellison’s accusers?  

I do. I don't support Ellison and never have.  I don't see any reason to highlight his religion though.  We don't generally refer to political leaders by prefacing their name with their religion. 

It's kind of weird to do that don't you think? Probably not, that article you linked is quite biased. 

Opposition to homosexual marriage, changing ones birth gender, and abortion does not make either Concerned Women For America or Alliance Defending Freedom or any other social conservative group a hate group.

Where did I call them a hate group?  I didn't.  They aren't exactly supportive of constitutional rights being extended to them. 

I do not and would not ever participate in their brand of feminism.  They speak out against rights of others. 

Screw them and their rhetoric. 

According to the progressive left and the internet we are all guilty if we are conservatives.  If we are overtly conservative then our sources are questionable.  If we believe in angels or creation or young earth, or oppose global warming as they call it then our sources are pseudoscience, and if we oppose abortion and same sex marriage as part of our religious beliefs we are a hate group per the haters at the SPLC and at MBFC.  That is how they black ball us daily.  And regularly they are changing more sites to questionable, pseudoscience, and hate because they and we are conservatives and or Christian conservatives.  Last summer MBFC has rerated a bunch of conservatives sites to censored her categories over those reasons and none other because the owner there is a liberal scientist doctor who openly hates Christians and conservatives.  

Religious beliefs are questionable if they support Trump and all the behavior and lack of character that goes with him, which includes breaking (or thinking he could break with impunity) all the commandments.  Instead of getting mad at 'the progressive left' try examining the values claimed by the right, take a long hard look.  And don't get huffy when sites that pass on lies and Russian propaganda get caught and killed (isn't catch and kill a conservative favorite?).  Find clean sites.

The sites are clean sites.  MBFC is not and neither is SPLC.  They are bigoted hate sites run by closed minded men who presume to sit in judgement of others when they themselves are hate filled human debris who need the sites they are trying to Black ball by the lies they peddle, to sue them for all they have and run them out of business.  SPLC just lost a case and settled for $3 million to a Muslim falsely accused.  Americans Defending Freedom another site libeled and defamed by both is full of hotshot lawyers who likely helped the Muslim man vs. SPLC.  Perhaps D. Van Zandt needs their legal attention.  

Damn right your sources are pseudoscience.  You can believe in angels and Christianity all you want, but when your beliefs affect others then it becomes a problem.  We have very valid scientific evidence that the earth is older than 6K years, is round not flat, that global warming is exacerbated by human activity.  No one cares if you oppose abortion or same sex marriage...don't participate, but you don't have the right to force those beliefs on others.  

Really?  Where is the force.  Advocacy for an issue or value is not forcing it upon anyone.  

Advocacy for an issue or value is not forcing it upon anyone.  

advocating for removal of a right granted, is forcing it upon all women regardless of their beliefs.

As it is now, no one is forced to have or not have an abortion.  

And if Roe vs Wade were ever overturned most abortion would still happen as each state would make its own rules as it was before under the 10th amendment with a power not enumerated to the federal government being returned to the states and the people where it belongs.  

It is NOT a state issue.  It does not belong at the state level. A woman's right to dominion over her body is a Constitutional right.  You enjoy that right, why do you think women should be subjected to states that don't view a woman as qualified to determine her own health care?

The only force here is the muzzling of thought, opinion, and speech by certain people for no other reason than a liberal secularist so called scientist worshipped here as if his word were god doesn’t like conservatives and Christians.  

Really and we were all pre born human, male or female and we had a right to life at that point in our development just as current pre born baby boys and girls do now.  No one had a “right” to an abortion in the constitution from 1787 to 1973 and then without amendment a so called right no one knew about all those 185+ prior years suddenly materializes in the minds of 7 men out of the blue.  

No one had a “right” to an abortion in the constitution from 1787 to 1973 and then without amendment a so called right no one knew about all those 185+ prior years suddenly materializes in the minds of 7 men out of the blue.  

Your history is quite incomplete. Maybe you should go review the matter again.

Abortions have been carried out legal or not throughout human history. The only thing you're advocating is the end to safe and legal abortion.  It isn't going to go away. It will cause more women to die for having unintentionally become pregnant.

Actually I was talking about constitutional rights not emotional rhetoric.  

Hirono's mentor, Senator Daniel Inoyue, was accused of sexually assaulting and intimidating numerous women.  Hirono stayed loyal to him.

Perhaps she should make amends to the victims she ignored before accusing others of crimes merely because they are Conservatives. 

Good points!  

Thank you Senator Hirono!  You helped make Kavanaugh a Justice on SCOTUS and woke up the conservative and GOP base for the election.  Concerned Women For America will prevail over  NOW.