Obama's evolution?
I recently made headlines on the Huffington Post -- one of the biggest liberal news sources -- for speaking against Obama’s betrayal of Americans over real marriage.
He has tried to cover up his flip flop on homosexual “marriage” by describing it as evolution -- and I called him out on it.
You and I both know that he has been working to further homosexual “marriage” for years while continually telling his supporters otherwise -- this just makes it official.
The Homosexual Lobby couldn’t be happier to have a President who openly supports their agenda, but they are also worried.
They know that many in the Obama camp only supported him because they believed he would defend marriage.
Well his deceit is finally public for everyone to see.
And I will not let the leftist elite like the Huffington Post stop me from speaking out about it.
While I am frustrated with those who unknowingly put a radical homosexual activist in the White House, I cannot help feeling sorry for them as well.
They were all deceived.
Below is a video I made over three years ago.
In it I interviewed Obama supporters who were just leaving his presidential inauguration...
...and every single one of them expressed their absolute commitment to real marriage. One man and one woman.
When will the administration accept that the majority of Americans do not want homosexual “marriage” in our country?
Click here to see the complete video.
For the Family,
Eugene Delgaudio
President, Public Advocate of the United States
P.S. Please prayerfully consider chipping in with a donation of $10 or more to help Public Advocate fight for traditional values.
Breaking News from Western Journalism
Jun 02, 2012 02:51 pm | Daniel Noe
Jun 02, 2012 02:23 pm | Breaking News
The
leader of the government regularly sits down with his senior generals
and spies and advisers and reviews a list of the people they want him to
authorize their agents to kill. They do this every Tuesday morning when
the… Continue to Post
Jun 02, 2012 02:13 pm | Tim Powers
First
off, let me clarify one thing for my readers. NOWHERE in the United
States Constitution is it stated that the federal government has the
right to ban the expression of any organized religion. In fact, it is
quite to… Continue to Post
Jun 02, 2012 02:07 pm | Kris Zane
Jun 02, 2012 01:51 pm | Kevin Probst
A
nation once known for the liberty it provided for its citizens is now
known for the burden of debt it has saddled on its citizens. The
massive, incomprehensible figure of $15 trillion dollars is a number we
like to… Continue to Post
Jun 02, 2012 01:47 pm | Kris Zane
Jun 02, 2012 01:41 pm | Tim Bryce
I
guess I am one of those citizens who doesn’t understand what all the
fuss is regarding voter identification cards. For as long as I can
remember, I have always had such a card and cannot imagine voting
without it.… Continue to Post
Jun 02, 2012 01:38 pm | Breaking News
The communistic rabble-rousers at the left-wing hate group known as the
Southern Poverty Law Center have produced yet another libelous smear of
well-meaning Americans who would like to see their Constitution
enforced. This time the smears, lies, false innuendo,… Continue to Post
Jun 02, 2012 01:33 pm | Breaking News
Apparently,
“tax the billionaires” is a better rallying cry for his reelection
campaign than “look at my record.” Here is the list, not for the faint
of heart, of Obama’s class warfare attacks.
1. Attacking capitalism
The Obama campaign is… Continue to Post
Jun 02, 2012 01:29 pm | Twila Le Page
After
I learned recently that 65 million Christians did not vote in the last
general election, I was dismayed. What a crying shame! No wonder we were
handed our new inexperienced, socialist President on a silver platter,
with so many… Continue to Post
Jun 02, 2012 01:19 pm | Michael J. Nellett
Let’s
see politicians run on their records and their accomplishments for a
change, not on the politics of character assassination. Of course, Obama
has NEVER run a campaign on his record since he got into politics. His
tactic IS character… Continue to Post
Jun 02, 2012 01:18 pm | Rev Michael Bresciani
Who has not heard the expression that if given enough time, the truth
will eventually come out? In fact, in the Biblical record, the opposite
is spoken of in precise and clear terms. According to the prophetic
message of… Continue to Post
Jun 02, 2012 01:08 pm | Daniel Noe
Jun 02, 2012 01:03 pm | Breaking News
President
Barack Obama cited a Republican “fever” as the reason why he hasn’t
been able to make progress on deficit reduction or immigration reform at
a Minneapolis fundraiser today.
The remarks are one of Obama’s sharpest Republican critiques — equating…
Continue to Post
Jun 02, 2012 12:50 pm | Breaking News
The
judge has revoked the bond of George Zimmerman, the neighborhood
watchman charged with shooting and killing 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.
Zimmerman must report to Seminole County jail by Sunday at 2:30 p.m.
The state filed the motion on Friday just… Continue to Post
Jun 02, 2012 12:45 pm | Daniel Noe
Jun 02, 2012 12:40 pm | Breaking News
Nearly
100 high-ranking General Services Administration employees assigned to
work from home reportedly still spent $750,000 on travel over nine
months, according to records submitted to Capitol Hill committees,
prompting the agency to respond Saturday to a request for more… Continue to Post
Jun 02, 2012 12:28 pm | Breaking News
With
a Supreme Court decision on healthcare fast approaching, House
Republicans are doubling down on efforts to bring attention to President
Obama’s signature legislative issue.
The effort, which includes votes on several measures to repeal taxes
under the law, is… Continue to Post
Jun 02, 2012 12:24 pm | Breaking News
“Not
to be used as safety barriers” was the warning on the safety barriers
that the police laid around the gates of Bilderberg. The officers were
firm but fair. “Madam, please step away with the balloons,” they asked a
protester,… Continue to Post
Jun 02, 2012 11:34 am | Breaking News
PRINCETON,
N.J., June 2 (UPI) – The percentage of U.S. residents who believe God
created human beings less than 10,000 years ago has changed little in
the past 30 years, a Gallup poll says.
In a report Friday, the Gallup organization… Continue to Post
RON PAUL: Why I voted No on H.R. 3541 Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act (PRENDA) of 2012
Now, let's let him explain WHY
Mr. PAUL: Mr. Speaker, as an OB-GYN who has delivered over 4,000 babies, I certainly abhor abortion. And I certainly share my colleagues' revulsion at the idea that someone would take an innocent unborn life because they prefer to have a child of a different gender. However, I cannot support H.R. 3541, the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act, because this bill is unconstitutional. Congress's jurisdiction is limited to those areas specified in the Constitution. Nowhere in that document is Congress given any authority to address abortion in any manner. Until 1973, when the Supreme Court usurped the authority of the States in the Roe v. Wade decision, no one believed or argued abortion was a Federal issue.
I also cannot support H.R. 3541 because it creates yet another set of Federal criminal laws, even though the Constitution lists only three Federal crimes: piracy, treason, and counterfeiting. All other criminal matters are expressly left to States under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, and criminal laws relating to abortion certainly should be legislated by States rather than Congress.
I have long believed that abortion opponents make a mistake by spending their energies on a futile quest to make abortion a Federal crime. Instead, pro-life Americans should work to undo Roe v. Wade and give the power to restrict abortion back to the States and the people. It is particularly disappointing to see members supporting this bill who rightfully oppose ludicrous interpretations of the Commerce Clause when it comes to the national health care law, which also abuses the Commerce Clause to create new Federal crimes.
Pro-life Americans believe all unborn life is precious and should be protected. Therefore we should be troubled by legislation that singles out abortions motivated by a ``politically incorrect'' reason for special Federal punishment. To my conservative colleagues who support this bill: what is the difference in principle between a Federal law prohibiting ``sex selection'' abortions and Federal hate crimes laws? After all, hate crime laws also criminalize thoughts by imposing additional stronger penalties when a crime is motivated by the perpetrator's animus toward a particular race or gender.
I also question whether this bill would reduce the number of abortions. I fear instead that every abortion provider in the Nation would simply place a sign in their waiting room saying ``It is a violation of Federal law to perform an abortion because of the fetus' gender. Here is a list of reasons for which abortion is permissible under Federal law.''
Mr. Speaker, instead of spending time on this unconstitutionally, ineffective, and philosophically flawed bill, Congress should use its valid authority to limit the jurisdiction of activist Federal courts and (thereby) protect state laws restoring abortion. This is the constitutional approach to effectively repealing Roe v. Wade. Instead of focusing on gimmicks and piecemeal approaches, true conservatives should address the horror of abortion via the most immediate, practical, and effective manner possible: returning jurisdiction over abortion to the States.
Mr. PAUL: Mr. Speaker, as an OB-GYN who has delivered over 4,000 babies, I certainly abhor abortion. And I certainly share my colleagues' revulsion at the idea that someone would take an innocent unborn life because they prefer to have a child of a different gender. However, I cannot support H.R. 3541, the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act, because this bill is unconstitutional. Congress's jurisdiction is limited to those areas specified in the Constitution. Nowhere in that document is Congress given any authority to address abortion in any manner. Until 1973, when the Supreme Court usurped the authority of the States in the Roe v. Wade decision, no one believed or argued abortion was a Federal issue.
I also cannot support H.R. 3541 because it creates yet another set of Federal criminal laws, even though the Constitution lists only three Federal crimes: piracy, treason, and counterfeiting. All other criminal matters are expressly left to States under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, and criminal laws relating to abortion certainly should be legislated by States rather than Congress.
I have long believed that abortion opponents make a mistake by spending their energies on a futile quest to make abortion a Federal crime. Instead, pro-life Americans should work to undo Roe v. Wade and give the power to restrict abortion back to the States and the people. It is particularly disappointing to see members supporting this bill who rightfully oppose ludicrous interpretations of the Commerce Clause when it comes to the national health care law, which also abuses the Commerce Clause to create new Federal crimes.
Pro-life Americans believe all unborn life is precious and should be protected. Therefore we should be troubled by legislation that singles out abortions motivated by a ``politically incorrect'' reason for special Federal punishment. To my conservative colleagues who support this bill: what is the difference in principle between a Federal law prohibiting ``sex selection'' abortions and Federal hate crimes laws? After all, hate crime laws also criminalize thoughts by imposing additional stronger penalties when a crime is motivated by the perpetrator's animus toward a particular race or gender.
I also question whether this bill would reduce the number of abortions. I fear instead that every abortion provider in the Nation would simply place a sign in their waiting room saying ``It is a violation of Federal law to perform an abortion because of the fetus' gender. Here is a list of reasons for which abortion is permissible under Federal law.''
Mr. Speaker, instead of spending time on this unconstitutionally, ineffective, and philosophically flawed bill, Congress should use its valid authority to limit the jurisdiction of activist Federal courts and (thereby) protect state laws restoring abortion. This is the constitutional approach to effectively repealing Roe v. Wade. Instead of focusing on gimmicks and piecemeal approaches, true conservatives should address the horror of abortion via the most immediate, practical, and effective manner possible: returning jurisdiction over abortion to the States.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)