Tag Archives: lesbians

Lesbians are the ‘REAL EMBODIMENT of Catholic teaching’ – CNN host Michael Smerconish

from The Right Scoop

Commentary by John Velisek USN (Ret), staff writer

Bill Donahue of the Catholic League was invited onto the Smerconish show on CNN in order to defend a decision by a private Catholic school to fire a teacher who had revealed herself to be gay and in a gay marriage. Halfway through the interview, Michael Smerconish affirms the lesbians’ view that they are the ‘real embodiment’ of Catholic teaching. Cuz that makes a lot of sense.

Of course, people who get their understanding of Christian doctrine from making fun of televangelists while smoking pot in college and from snarky criticisms on the Daily Show aren’t the best scholars when it comes to biblical theology. That’s why Smerconish starts whining about the ‘judge not lest ye be judged’ text without any understanding of the context and intent of the quote. Apparently this is part of the CNN anchor idiot handbook.

The Catholic Church makes it very clear that only a Catholic person can teach religious lessons in a Catholic institution of education, and if the lesbians were good adherents, they’d know that. I mean hell, I’m not even Catholic and I know that.
My Opinion: I have to admit, I never thought even a lesbian would say something THAT stupid. Can anyone show me any scripture that claims that lesbians share anything with Christian belief or with Catholic Canon law? Perhaps he is reading the new RAINBOW bible that removes all mention of homosexuality in the original bible. We wouldn’t want the precious snowflakes to feel unwanted. They stole the rainbow from the Bible as one of Gods signs, why not the whole Bible? Sorry, won’t work. Those of us who are Christian know better and we represent far more than 3% of the population. We just aren’t as loud as homosexual advocate and hate groups. And yes, we are laughing at you.

Lesbian Hawaiian legislator gets a glimpse of the rage Gays unleash on anyone who dares oppose them

by Emma Karlin, staff writer

Hawaii has legalized same gender marriage. The Aloha State Gays have been handed everything they demanded, but alas they are not happy. It seems like they never are.

During the public hearings on the question of Gay marriage (SB 1) people lined up and in some cases waited four days to exercise their right to speak for just two minutes as they expressed their opinion on the matter.

Although everyone knew the outcome was a foregone conclusion that would see the Gays winning the day, the hearings and subsequent final vote produced an unexpected result. After actually listening to the points the speakers made, State Representative Jo Jordan voted “No.”

While Hawaii is a super stronghold of liberalism, a stray “No” vote on an issue like this is not surprising unless it comes from an open lesbian.  Jordan explained that she came to the hearing with an open mind, but after listening to explanations of the damage SB 1 would do to churches she concluded it would not be “protective enough” of the rights of Hawaii’s conservative minorities. Seeing there was neither way nor will to address these concerns, Jordan became the first openly gay legislator in America to vote against a Gay marriage bill. Her vote popped the lid off a Pandora’s Box of reactions from both sides that surprised her.

Although she had expected to be attacked by the religious right nothing of the sort happened. Instead, she was politely thanked for “at least listening.” It was the people of her own LGBT community that unleashed a torrent of bile and hatred toward her which “took her aback.”

The attacks opened Jordan’s eyes. She reports having thought, “Wow, so much for minorities that have been suppressed.”

The lesson here is nothing new to those of us on the Right.  We know the Left demands absolutely 100 percent worship of their issues and never allows diversity of thought or speech.  This is especially true when they push their own people against a wall and “get in their face” as Barack Obama has recommended.     

Unfortunately, their intimidation works every time we let it.      



Mommy Angela and Mommy Jennifer are ruining children’s lives but does anyone care?


By Emma Karlin, staff writer

This story tells us of why lesbians playing make believe with the lives of children is a terrible thing. In Kansas in 2009 three amoral people, two lesbians and a male of unidentified sexual orientation colluded to create a homemade baby.  The male provided his sperm and the two lesbian mommies used it to impregnate lesbian “Mommy Jennifer” Schreiner.

The two Mommies, Mommy Angela Bauer and her honey Mommy Jennifer made contact with the donor William Marotta, through Craig’s List saying, “We are foster and adoptive parents and now we desire to share a pregnancy and birth together.”

Presumably using something like a sterile turkey baster, Mommy Jennifer conceived a baby girl. Since all had signed a “legal” document excusing Marotta of any obligation to financially support the baby, the two Mommies thought they would live happily ever after. If things went wrong if need be, the State of Kansas would ultimately support their “We don’t need a man to have a baby” baby.

When the little girl was born, Mommy Jennifer refused to name her father on her birth certificate.

 When the Mommy Angela and Mommy Jennifer “family” broke up, Mommy Jennifer applied for, and got welfare payments to support the little girl.

Now the State of Kansas has stepped in to demand the welfare payments back. They want the money from Marotta.

The amoral trio is appalled! “Why, WE all agreed Bill would not be responsible for the baby. WE made this baby and the State’s only part in our life is paying for the child we made without a man – well kind of ‘without a man’” the Mommies are saying.

These mommies were allowed to “adopt” eight children during their eight years together which came to an end the year after they produced their home made baby.

One is now just three months old meaning these two lovebirds had been separated for at least 18 months when they were allowed to adopt their latest child.  What kind of a system allows something like this? How could anyone look at these two and think it would be a good idea to let them adopt another child?

And now whose children are these adoptees anyway? Are they Mommy Angels’ or Mommy Jennifer’s? If they are Mommy Jennifer’s can she share her custodial rights with the new person in her life – a man?

If Mommy Angela doesn’t like the arrangement does she fight Mommy Jennifer for custody using free legal services provided to her by the State of Kansas? After all she is on welfare.

And what of the home made little girl; the “we don’t need a man to make a baby” baby?  Does anyone care about this little girl?