Tuesday, April 17, 2018

"Do You Believe Gay Sex Is Perversion?"--Senator Booker to Mike Pompeo

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

It's stunning but true.

Senator Cory Booker repeatedly asked Mike Pompeo, President Trump's highly qualified nominee for Secretary of State, that question in the hearing last week.

He also demanded to know exactly what Pompeo, well known for his biblical Christian beliefs, believes about same-sex marriage.

Is this the new standard for anyone who now wants to hold public office in America?

It is with a growing number of far-Left activists in public office.


If Booker had asked the question once it would have been shocking, but asking it repeatedly is stunningly outrageous.

Booker seemed nearly out of control in pursuit of his litmus test for public office.

Booker referenced a speech Pompeo gave at a church three years ago when he quoted a pastor as saying, "America had worshiped other gods and called it multiculturalism. We'd endorsed perversion and called it an alternative lifestyle."

Then Booker asked, on the record, "Is being gay a perversion?"

Pompeo, a former Congressman, presently serves as CIA Director and has been nominated by the president to become Secretary of State.

His answer to Booker was that when he was a politician, he did not think it was appropriate for same-sex couples to marry, and he stood by that....

Booker cut him off, demanding to know if he, a Conservative Christian, approved of "gay sex."

Booker asked, "You believe gay sex is a perversion, yes or no?" Then again he demanded, "Yes or no, do you believe that gay sex is a perversion?" And again, "Yes or no, do you believe gay sex is a perversion?"

Booker is a hypocrite.

Pompeo is a class act. And a committed Christian.

Booker's attempt to paint Pompeo as a bigot comes in the backdrop of his outspoken, undying support for President Obama---who, with Booker's full support, came into office claiming publicly he opposed same-sex "marriage."

And Obama was still saying he opposed it in 2010. Only later did he "evolve."

Why was that okay for Obama, and not for Pompeo? Granted the Secretary of State office is very important---but is it more so than the presidency?

Booker said that as Secretary of State Pompeo would be representing America at a time “hate acts” were increasing in the U.S.

The far Left Huffington Post published a story a while back that seemed to question Booker’s sexual orientation, citing an interview he gave to the Washington Post:

“Booker, who recently won the Democratic primary for a special upcoming Senate election, is 44 and unmarried and does not speak publicly about his personal life. But, the mayor tells the Washington Post that he doesn’t mind the gay rumors that have bubbled up from time to time during his political career."
“…People who think I’m gay, some part of me thinks it’s wonderful. Because I want to challenge people on their homophobia. I love seeing on Twitter when someone says I’m gay, and I say, ‘So what does it matter if I am? So be it. I hope you are not voting for me because you are making the presumption that I’m straight.’ ”


Regardless of Booker's chosen personal sexual behavior, he does not have the right to use his elected position to attempt to punish highly qualified people (or anyone else) who holds traditional biblical beliefs on human sexuality and marriage.

This, however, is not an isolated attempt. In fact, the Washington Times wrote an article last fall titled, "Religious Litmus Tests are Becoming all The Rage of the Left." They reminded their readers that, "The Founding Fathers were pretty clear when it comes to religious freedom. Article VI of the Constitution mandates that ' no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust."

Ironically, Article VI was to be sure non-religious folks were not discriminated against. Apparently, no good deed goes unpunished.

The Times notes that Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), at that time, was imposing a litmus test on Trump appointee Amy Coney Barrett, a professor at Norte Dame Law School, because Feinstein said "the Catholic dogma lives loudly" within Barrett.

However, Feinstein had not done her homework---if so, she would have known that Barrett had actually written articles on the importance of judges holding both their convictions and the law without compromising either, saying, "The public is entitled to impartial justice."

Uninformed Feinstein actually quoted from one of the articles claiming it "proved that Barrett was compromised by her Catholic beliefs," when in fact the article was making the opposite case. Had she actually read what Barrett wrote she would have known, but the rage of the Left is not big on facts.

The Times article points to other similar instances where the same kind of inquisition was held.

Example: Bernie Sanders grilling Russ Vought, another conservative biblical Christian Trump appointee.

Bernie Sanders demanded to know if Vought believed Jesus is the only way to salvation---a belief that therefore condemns Muslims, Hindu, etc. to eternal Hell.

These people find the biblical views of people like us intolerable. I know---tolerance is supposed to be their battle cry and their virtue--- so Hillary chose to use "deplorables"---either means they want us to shut up and be quiet. And stay out of the way of progress.

The Signal, an arm of Heritage Foundation, published an article Friday titled, "Cory Booker's Inquisition Into Marriage Views is About Keeping you Silent."

The Signal article says, "Booker seemed surprised to learn that opposition to same-sex marriage is still very much a mainstream view in America. According to a 2017 Gallup Poll, about 1 in 3 Americans disagreed with same-sex marriage. That's about 100 million people."

The piece says "unfortunately, the US government has gone far beyond standing for basic human rights and has sought to advance a liberal LGBT agenda---calling it a "New Cultural Imperialism."

Justice Samuel Alito defined the matter in the 2015 case of Obergefell when it was before the Supreme Court.

In dissent, he said: "I assume that those who cling to old beliefs will be able to whisper their thoughts in the recesses of their homes, but if they repeat those views in public, they will risk being labeled as bigots and treated as such by governments, employers, and schools."

And now he could add senators.

The Left has co-opted these moral issues by a sustained incrementalism to redefine marriage and human sexuality over the past 25 years.

And they have done so in great part by lying to the public and shaming conservative Christians.

The Signal article says, "The Left's monopoly on this issue ends when conservatives, like Pompeo, begin refusing to hide their views and in fact speak up in the public square."

If the 100 million of us who hold these biblical Truths on marriage and the sanctity of life will stand up in our own public square, as Pompeo and others are doing---what and where ever our public square may be---and stand for righteousness, we will find, I believe, the winds of history blowing in a better direction---and the fires of restoration and renewal will be sparked.

Note: A group of Christian leaders has now written a letter to Congress demanding Pompeo be confirmed.

Be Informed. Be Bold. Be Faithful. Be Heard. Be Prayerful.


6 comments:


  1. YES!

    It is a perversion of human sexuality advanced by those who have corrupted their own minds and bodies and want to drag everyone else down to their level

    Queer sex is not about sex but forcing everyone to see things their way

    It is completely and utterly perverse in every sense of the word

    I use to think live and let live but they have proven repeatedly they cannot let anyone else have any thoughts or views that they do not approve. They are the enemies of all that is good and right. They are slave masters not advocates of freedom. They serve what is the destroyer of all life, their own lust

    Everyone's life is in danger with them

    ReplyDelete

  2. There is a defining litmus test as to whether one is a defender of the Republic or its enemy

    Not whether one demands rights and freedom for themselves but whether they grant the same rights and freedoms to others regardless of who they are.

    Those who will not grant to others the same rights and freedoms they demand for themselves do not deserve to have them either

    That is the founding principle, you can only lose your rights and freedoms when you deny others theirs and that means ONE law for all, by using the things which are common to us all, and since we are ALL born of one mother and one father that is the only type of marriage common to us ALL

    Everyone getting to decide what type of marriage works best for them then force others to accept it denies others the liberty one demands for themselves and divides us a people

    Homosexual marriage was a coup to undermine the very foundation of the nation and why out of 325 million people only the vote of 5 counted. It has nothing to do with how a free society works, we must share things in common or we will cease to exist as a people.

    It is not about your rights and freedoms but the defending of rights and freedoms for ALL

    That is the litmus test as to whether one is for liberty

    ReplyDelete
  3. Perversion is what it is, and it warps the brain and soul to accept all kinds of evil. We probably won't hear much about the Hart family in the coming weeks--the LGBT poster family that perished in murder/suicide. The two lesbians' car left the road going over a cliff at a high speed with no braking--6 children are believed perished with the two adults. Three childrens' bodies are missing--they may have washed out to sea. According to the FBI the children had been drugged. Probably, the two lesbian women could not face the coming state Child Protective Services investigation that was about to happen.
    No matter how accepting of gay folks that we as a people become, they will always remain unstable and probably unhappy. They have God's conscience inside them and will never be able to totally stifle it. We as a society should not be telling youth that being gay is OK--just one of many choices. It is unhealthy and personally disastrous for most. Disease is rampant, suicide is 3 times the norm (for youth and adults), and the average lifespan of participants (both gays and lesbians) shortened by almost two decades.
    Is this really something we want to push onto our youth without any of the normal warnings? It's what the gay community wants to do. And if you try to speak out, the tolerance folks will shut you up fast. "Religious" litmus tests are just one more example of how they try to shut us up.

    ReplyDelete
  4. James 4:4, anyone chosing to be a friend of the world makes themselves an enemy of God. God doesn't condemn anyone to eternal damnation, we make that choice ourselves. Thus the rage we see from the antireligious crowd is really aimed at God through the people. They are furious that God has set up rules that they can't avoid. At best they can only ignore them and make national law that opposes God's law. But that in no way changes God's law. Indeed they choose separation from God for eternity over life with God for eternity. God says Behold I have set before you this day ... life and death. Choose life.

    ReplyDelete
  5. There was a time in America when those who openly indulged in sexual sin were shamed by their community. The predominant value system was that of the Judeo-Christian God and Christianity. When shamed, most individuals would sink back into 'the dark closet'.

    Today Christians who expose their beliefs publically are shamed, and curiously enough most Christians, (when shamed in this way), silently withdraw and sink back into 'the dark closet'.

    There is no “light” in the closet, so it is not where Christians belong.

    Those who fear Jesus are in fact Christophobes, and they existed in Jesus time as they do today. Many were known as “Pharisees.” As Solomon pointed out ‘nothing under the sun changes’. The Pharisees used their “religious test’ to justify the crucifixion of Christ BY the government. Jesus had the answer in Mark 12;17…

    Then Jesus said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's."

    Today, we do not wish to shame sexual sinners, but rather to communicate in love that we are concerned for their eternal salvation.

    When Government becomes the arbiter of morality, government becomes God. Government cannot by its own statutory restriction become the arbiter of morality because that would be a direct violation of the ‘separation of Church and State’ doctrine.

    One possible answer to these kinds of entrapment questions might be…

    “Senator, if one church believes one thing to be moral, and another church believes it to be immoral, I believe it is improper for Government at any level to become involved in the practice of condemning one and praising the other.”

    OR…

    “Morality” is defined differently by different people Senator. That is why we have the law. I will obey and support the law and the Constitution.

    OR..

    “Yes or No Senator….When the government of Rome condemned and attempted to humiliate Jesus Christ for His religious beliefs, was that proper or was that a violation?”

    Truth is a lonely warrior..

    G>T>

    ReplyDelete

Faith and Freedom welcomes your comment posts. Remember, keep it short, keep it on message and relevant, and identify your town.