Yet Another Ugly American

Hot on the heels of some ugly nonsense from the US President, the American Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has demonstrated that she can be rather ugly as well, if not rather naive. She has just been involved in two activities this week which not only seem to cancel each other out, but shows how bent she and Obama are on pushing their radical and anti-Christian agendas.

On the one hand Hillary was involved in yet more homosexual agenda pushing, while on the other hand she wants to further allow Muslims to censor all criticism and debate about Islam. Just how confused is this woman? Does she not even realise how at odds these two agendas are?

Just as Obama had made a big stink about the need to push for homosexual rights all around the world – whether other countries like it or not – so too Hillary has been on this crusade. Of concern is not just her promotion of this unhealthy lifestyle, but her utterly idiotic and morally vacuous way in which she has promoted it.

Consider one write-up on this: “In a speech designed to convince the world that ‘gay rights are human rights, and human rights are gay rights,’ Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said religious objections to homosexuality should not stand in the way of vigorous United Nations action to promote the homosexual rights agenda.

“On Tuesday, Clinton said promoting the global acceptance of ‘gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people’ is ‘one of the remaining human rights challenges of our time,’ likening the effort to ending racial, sexual, or religious discrimination.

“She noted that perhaps the ‘most challenging issue arises when people cite religious or cultural values as a reason to violate or not to protect the human rights of LGBT citizens.’ These objections, she said, are ‘not unlike the justification offered for violent practices towards women like honor killings, widow burning, or female genital mutilation’.”

There you have it: she not only denigrates any religious objection to homosexuality, thus thumbing her nose at the overwhelming majority of the world’s population, but she compares it to honor killings and widow burning! Just how utterly devoid of any logical or mental clarity is she?

To simply share one’s concern about homosexuality – which of course can be done without a shred of religious baggage – is on a par with burning widows alive. Thank you Hillary for demonstrating to the world the intelligence and conceptual clarity of the American leadership team.

This is simply another example of Obama’s and Hillary’s war on religion, and Christianity in particular. It is mind-boggling stuff, but these guys are on a mission to convert the whole world to their secular left ideology. She is confusing genuine human rights abuses with pushing a social engineering crusade.

As the editors of National Review remarked, such basic distinctions are crucial: “There is some that is commendable and much that is pernicious in Secretary Clinton’s speech Tuesday announcing that the United States will be making ‘LGBT rights’ — that is, the rights of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgendered persons — ‘a priority of our foreign policy’ and a factor in determining the uses of ‘foreign assistance.’

“Support for human rights has a place in foreign policy, albeit a subordinate one. Among those rights, certainly, is the right of homosexuals to be free from violent attacks and other draconian punishments. As Clinton rightly notes, if there are fundamental rights at all (and the foundational premise of this republic is that there are) then they ‘are not conferred by the government,’ but ours ‘because we are human.’ The secretary then goes on to claim that human rights and gay rights are ‘one and the same,’ which we suppose is true insofar as the latter collapses into the former.

“What we don’t understand is how Clinton’s view — that being human vests us with certain rights — entails or even is compatible with a second set of rights that one enjoys by virtue of being homosexual. When Clinton says, ‘It is a violation of human rights when people are beaten or killed because of their sexual orientation,’ no recourse is required to a gay right. The words ‘because of their sexual orientation’ are superfluous. When she says that the horrors of ‘corrective’ rape against women who are suspected of being homosexual are violations of a right, to what right could she be referring besides the right not to be raped, simpliciter?”

Benjamin Bull asks why the pair is not focusing on what is perhaps the greatest violation of human rights around the world today: the persecution of Christians. He says, “With all due respect to the president, perhaps this is an all-too-obvious attempt to garner votes from a group that wasn’t that impressed with his performance until he successfully imposed homosexual behavior on the military earlier this year. Yet while he’s doing his best to appeal to that group, Christians around the world continue to be persecuted—to be hunted like animals, then tortured and killed when captured—yet we are still awaiting a serious White House memorandum on their behalf.

“Perhaps Christ’s famous words, ‘The first shall be last and the last shall be first,’ are applicable here, for it seems that the president, who long ago abandoned a defense of our nation’s Judeo-Christian underpinnings, is basically abandoning Christians altogether. The most obvious and recent example is that there is no word of sorrow offered up for the Coptic Christians who have been beaten and shot in Egypt.

“Nor is there any noticeable attempt to pressure India into overturning the anti-Christian legislation it has in place—legislation that makes it illegal to convert from Hinduism to Christianity. It is a fact that Hindu fundamentalists emboldened by this legislation have actually begun to bully and aggressively pursue Christians in their country. Why isn’t the plight of Christians around the world today worthy of a White House memorandum, Mr. President?”

But perhaps the most bizarre feature of all this is that while Clinton and Obama are pushing their homosexual agenda globally, they are also trying to cozy up to the Muslim world – go figure. Hillary was also this week doing her best to get on side with the Muslim world, as she met with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.

As one commentator lamented, “Today (December 12, 2011) may well go down in history as the day when the light of free speech and freedom of expression in the U.S. began to flicker and die, when the ongoing attacks on free speech and freedom of expression in America really began to gain momentum and traction. With the collusion and support of President Obama Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is meeting in Washington today with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation to discuss methods and develop strategies to curb and prevent questioning, criticizing and/or discussing Islam or anything related to it in America…if this effort proves successful it may soon be a crime to question, criticize or discuss Islam or anything related to it in the United States. Islam being Islam and Islamists being Islamists I may be punished or even killed for writing something like this and you may be punished or even killed for reading it.

“This is not alarmist. There is no room whatsoever for free speech or freedom of expression in Islam and criticizing or questioning it is verboten under Islamic law, with grave consequences for those who dare to do so. The OIC is made up of 56 governments and the Palestinian authority and also claims authority over Muslims living in non-Muslim lands. Its purpose is to establish the supremacy of Islam and Islamic law throughout the world, including the U.S. In order to do this in the United States it must first eliminate free speech and freedom of expression there and Obama and Clinton are helping it do exactly that.

“Her meeting with the OIC is beyond disgraceful and shameful. It is a direct, frontal assault on the U.S. itself by the highest level of government. It is a direct, frontal assault on American’s right to think and act freely and question, criticize or discuss anything they want to, Islam or anything related to it or anything else. The Islamization of America is well and truly underway and has been for some time. It must be stopped in its tracks and reversed or freedom of speech and freedom of expression are dead and the country along with them. Maybe you and I too.”

Just how bizarre is all this? With the one hand the Obama Administration is promoting the militant homosexual agenda, and with the other, the totalitarian aims of the Islamists. Is this government schizoid or what? Or is it just so intent on destroying Christianity and the West, that anything goes? Whatever the reason, it is clearly time for these two ugly Americans to step down, and fast.

[1478 words]

11 Replies to “Yet Another Ugly American”

  1. Thanks again for an a very informative, if not disturbing article Bill. As you say, the White House agenda via Obama and Clinton are nothing less than appalling.
    Another term of Obama would mean that the USA would be entirely finished as a fredom loving, and free democratic society, let alone any expression of Christian belief.
    I try to follow much of American politics and the “race for the White House”. Personally I still believe in Herman Cain’s innocence of the charges levelled against him, and that he may well have been the best POTUS the USA never had in recent years. It was a deliberate and concerted campaign to destroy him, as he represented the greatest challenge to Obama on the ‘race’ issue alone I think.

    You are right to continually remind us of the pernicious evil represented by the homosexual agenda – it is destructive of everything Christian as we know.

    For your info – here in the UK there seems to be growing opposition to the “gay Marriage” proposals, and the C of has, in a somewhat rare display of moral and spiritual backbone, declared that SSMs cannot take place in Anglican churches.
    The issue of SSM is to receive formal UK government support in the form of some sort of proposed legislation in the New year.
    Also, you may be aware of the two excellent Christian campaigning organisations here – The Christian Institute, and ‘Christian Concern for the Nation’? Both are vigorously opposing the “gay” agenda, and also robustly defending many individual Christians who are being hauled before the courts on flimsy charges of breaking “equality” laws etc. (see
    What is so encouraging about the CI is the number of full time staff members who are well qualified and very young but mature, Christians.
    Again, thanks for the post.
    ‘The Lord God omnipotent reigns!”

    Graham Wood, UK

  2. Thanks Graham

    Yes quite right: another term of Obama and Clinton would be utterly disastrous. Yes Cain would be my choice, or Bachmann or Santorum. But whoever gets the Republican nod, he or she will be far better than the pretenders who are now in the White House.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  3. God is not mocked – soon or late these unfortunate people will stand before him to be judged – may they have a change of heart before that day!! – sadly the damage they are doing may remain long after they are forgotten. No doubt history will record the decline and decay of a once great nation under their “leadership” barring a miracle that is!
    Anna Cook

  4. To paraphrase Sarah Palin, don’t vote for “a charismatic guy with a teleprompter.”
    Ross McPhee

  5. Absolutely Bill. If President Obama isn’t voted out in 2012, the West is truly gone. But give Hillary some credit for consistency – she is against American and Western values that help in the promotion of Christianity and true freedom. So she makes friends with those who are fundamentally about undermining Christianity. Like rabid Leftists around the world, the main game is destruction – destruction of economies and of morality and belief that are grounded in Christianity. When Obama says, “God bless America”, I don’t know what he means by “God”, I don’t know what he means by “bless” and I certainly don’t know what he means by “America”.
    Conservatives get the blame for not caring for the poor. Is it caring to not set up systems that give people the dignity to work and care for their families? Is it caring to give people what is neither good for them personally nor for the rest of a society? I believe the real agenda of Leftists around the world is to expand their base of dependent voters. So they “kindly” dole out money (barely enough to live on), thus expanding their base and at the same time creating the need for bigger government. Robbing from the middle class through taxes is another bonus. If Obama cared about African Americans, for example, he would be in favour of the education voucher system that allows them a free choice of school for their children. But he doesn’t. And if Leftists cared about the poor they would promote charity. They don’t because charity offends their ideal of self-serving man. I don’t know how the Left keeps getting away with lies. Part of it is the selling of euphemisms. Take, for example, the recent Labour “conscience vote” about same sex marriage. Christians defended Julia Gillard just because they heard the word “conscience”. She has gotten away with betraying most Australians by saying she “believes in marriage between one man and one woman” but acting in a way that undermines that notion through offering Labour a conscience vote. People actually believe this habitual liar. And now she is going after Christians with her new attorney general so that anti-discrimination laws can be “freshened up”.
    Back to the Americans. If you want to read a great explanation of how the global financial crisis came about, as well as developing an understanding of where the liberal mindset comes from, read Peter Schweizer’s “Architects of Ruin”. 
    In “Architects of Ruin”, you can read how Hillary Clinton’s undergraduate thesis was on a nightmare character called Saul Alinsky and that Obama, too, was influenced by Alinsky’s disciples. This is a quote from the book about their guru : “A famous story about Alinsky has him asking a group of students why they wanted to be community activists. When they offered platitudes about helping others and making a difference, he quickly stopped them with a raised hand. ‘You want to organize for power!’ he screamed.”
    Angela Parham

  6. If the US Administration was merely trying to advocate not imprisoning, torturing, or even executing homosexuals for what they do in the privacy of their own bedrooms I would support them. However dime gets you a dollar it’s not just about that it’s the subliminal under the radar baggage that accompanies it – the glorification of the gay ‘lifestyle’, the ‘hate crimes legislation’, the indoctrination of children, the changes to school policies etc that is so insidious. Likewise I’d hazard the administration won’t push those policies hard in the Islamic world rather pick on easy target’s like those dissenting democratic governments in the West.
    Doug Holland

  7. I think of pictures of I’ve seen of Chinese Christians being tortured for their faith. Why aren’t governments speaking up for them? I guess it’s because we don’t want to upset a powerful and economically important trading partner.
    Ross McPhee

  8. Dear Bill, May I just be a little simplistic at the moment & suggest that Obama & Clinton are fully versed in the scenario of the rise of the antichrist, being, I believe, both powerful members of the Illuminati. (revealed recently in a disclosure on the internet – sorry, forgotten date & origin). Therefore both are agents of Satan &, of course, Christians are their No 1 enemy, to be neutralised ASAP. The only present problem is when will, if ever, the American Christians wake up & discern the obvious? Your program on internet is brilliant, Bill. Sincerely,
    June Westbury

  9. Thanks June

    Whatever may be the truth of their involvement in various sinister bodies, we all can agree that the Obamas and Clintons are bad news for faith, family and freedom – indeed, for America and the West.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  10. ‘I think of pictures of I’ve seen of Chinese Christians being tortured for their faith. Why aren’t governments speaking up for them? I guess it’s because we don’t want to upset a powerful and economically important trading partner.’

    Exactly Ross exactly, bit like Tianneman Square, or Christians in Saudi or Pakistan.

    Doug Holland

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *