Comical Politics

The Problem With the Supreme Court is That This is Probably True

The Press Is Wrong on Masterpiece Cakeshop. The Baker Lost..

Bakery owner Jack Phillips got the decision he wanted, but the next time he turns away a same-sex couple, he will lose his case.

Purdue Professor Yahya R. Kamalipour -- How Anti-American?

UPDATE: http://speakingtruthtopower.blogs.com/hoosiers_comical_higher_e/2013/09/why-is-purdue-university-supporting-a-jew-hating-speaker.html

____________________________________________________

Professor Kamalipour is a Muslim who has an ongoing relationship, paid for by Indiana Tax Payers with Tehran University.  Not only was he born and spend most of his upbringing in Iran; he has continued to enjoy the support of the Iranian Mullahs and most anti-American Iranians, if not other Muslims with the equivalant agenda.  Otherwise, how would it be possible for him to go back and forth between America and Iran without some one questioning his intention -- on either side of the equation. 

The following is a direct quote from him, in a Muslim journal of the problems of the world.

"My realisation, as a person who has travelled to more than 50 countries, is that different societies are more alike than different. The more I travel the more I realise this fact. The need of the hour is to get along with one another and,make friendship, and networks based on mutual respect and under- standing. The cause of majority of existing global problems is mere ignorance."

He completely ignores the acts of Muslims in killing Jews and Christians.  He is the justifier of Islamic hatred and death squads against women, Jews, Gays, Christians, and other infidels.  He defends by his statements and actions the beheading and hanging in Iran of all Gays and Lesbians.  He would seem to be a great supporter of the misogynistic beliefs of Islam.  He never says otherwise.  He never criticizes the actions of his fellow Iranians.

According to Prof. Yahya Kamalipour all the problems with Islam are just a matter of misunderstanding and have a moral equivalency to Christians and Jews.  A stand which is at its core anti-American and yet still funded by American taxpayers.  What he says in America is not what he can or does say in Iran.  How will Iran deal with him if they knew that most of his American supporters were homosexuals.  How will the middle-east Muslims interact with him because he has lied about his association with homosexuals, women, Jews, etc.  

I do not fault these various groups.  They are all good courageous people.  It is Professor Kamalipour who continuous his fraud of advancing himself on the backs of the oppressed.

It is time that Hoosier tax payers informed Purdue University that there is a limit to anti-American behavior, even from academics.

Related articles

Iran marks 24th anniversary of Imam Khomeini's Passing

Purdue University's Jewish Problem?

American Pastor Jailed in Iran Accused of Spying, Brainwashing Young Muslims

Betrayal: ‘Proud’ Dad Portman Flips the Meaning of State Support of Marriage

To either support his own guilt feelings or to accommodate the gay marriage lobby or because of pressure from his son and/or his wife Republican Congressman Rob Portman has turned the meaning of marriage and libertarianism on its head.  See the following confused explanation of his new stance:

Proud’ Dad Portman Flips to Support Gay Son on Same-Sex Marriage.

I cannot claim to know what is going on in Portman's head; but, I can evaluate what he says publicly and the policy stand he takes.  The libertarian position can only be defined as one where the state has nothing to do with marriage.  It would be fine and justifiable if he had taken that position and said that he had "re-thought" the question now that his son is at Yale and gay that state policy should say nothing about marriage.  Here he would be saying that government should get out of any recognition of, or any involvement with, marriage.  That would not be a stand for "gay marriage" or any definition of marriage.  It would be saying that people should be allowed to live as they want and with whom they want to and it is not the state's business.

But, Portman does make it the state's business.

If the state is going to recognize marriage, from a conservative point of view (and a libertarian one), it can only be because the state recognizes some overwhelming state, or societal interest.  These interests must at least be in the area of survival and/or national, i.e. state, security.   Nothing here would lead someone, under any circumstance, to support "gay marriage."  And neither can Representative Portman.

The state has for a long time recognized marriage as exclusively between one man and one women because of long standing historical and religious reasons.  Today under this theory it would be legitimate to exclude "gay marriage" under conservative concepts; but not under libertarian ones.  Libertarian concepts would at best say that there is no place for the state to be in the marriage definition business.  There are many, many definitions of marriage.  Why would one or two take precedence over all the rest? 

This is Portman's betrayal and the lie presented by his son.  It is also the lie which most gay activist present.

The only, and I mean only, reason that the state can justify in having an interest in marriage is national suicide as it relates to national security.  There is nothing in being a conservative or a libertarian that requires an individual or a society to commit suicide.  Therefore the one and sole state interest in marriage is the consequence of that coupling, which is more children.  Only the increase in fertility, i.e. new babies, justifies and explains the state's interest in marriage.  Under these principles, there would be greater justification for polygamy than there is from gay marriage.  (All states have a greater justification for polygamy than gay marriage; although, there are other social problems with polygamy.)

All these couplings have minimal advantage or no advantage to fertility: gay marriage, bestiality, general fetishes, co-habitation, marriage to inanimate objects, etc.  As a consequence, the state cannot and should not have anything to say, as far as policy, about these.

Portman, understandably as a bereaved father, has turned state policy on its head when it comes to gay marriage.  He not only betrayed his principles; he also stood the conservative and libertarian cause on its head.  There is no reason for him to continue in politics representing conservative/libertarian ideas.

Related articles

Boehner: 'I can't imagine' supporting a gay son's marriage

• Sen. Portman changes gay marriage stance (wcpo.com)
• Senator Rob Portman reveals he has a gay son, now supports same-sex marriage (thesunnews.typepad.com)
• Portman backs gay marriage after son comes out (politico.com)

Merry Christmas: Christianity 'close to extinction' in Middle East

At this time of the year, I want to wish all my Christian friends and supporters the best of hope and peace during this Holy Day season and may you all have a happy and joyous Christmas season.  I want all of you to think about what will really have consequences for Christians in the many future Holy seasons to come.  

Read the following article to see what is the coming in the new year for many Christian communities whose only sin was being Christian and in Islamic countries.

Christianity 'close to extinction' in Middle East - Telegraph.

After so many years of down playing what is in fact being done to Christianity by Islam, is it not time for Christians and their supporters to stand up and say "no more?" 

All of Christianity and its leaders have been telling you to be good in charity and be good to your fellow man.  This is all a good thing, a very good thing.   Christmas Holy season does call for charity upon the Christian flock.

But, the tough charity is the one that has risks and many times negative consequences to the charity giver.  That is the charity promoting and protecting the existence of Christianity and free Christians in the lands of its origin, the Middle East.   If that fight is lost, how well does anyone really believe Christianity will survive?  Without a living history, which is what is being destroyed by Muslims, no religion can survive on "purified air" or "luft" as the Germans would refer to it.

It is now time for all G-d fearing people to make a stand against the end of Middle Eastern Christianity by Muslims so that they too can have a Merry Christmas for centuries.

Related articles

• Christianity 'close to extinction' in Middle East... (telegraph.co.uk)
• What Do Frankincense, Christians and Bees Have In Common? (addisabram.wordpress.com)
• Christianity Now the Most Persecuted Religion (shepherdspiehole.typepad.com)
• Christianity 'close to extinction' in Middle East: Report (todayonline.com)
• British daily: Christianity "close to extinction" in the Middle East (pdavidhornik.typepad.com)

Hillary Clinton Compares Islamic Violence to Christianity

The pro-Islam stand of America's Secretary of State cannot be just an accident that all of sudden happened.  This is especially true with her anti-Christian retoric.  Who wrote this for Hillary Clinton?  Her aide Huma Abadin?

Hillary Compares Islamic Violence to Christianity.

Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann is right.  This needs investigating and further questioning.  Are these "new" ideas of Secretary Clinton?  And if so, why?  Why is Clinton finding that this is an opportune time to beat up on Christianity?  Anyone who things that in this attack the Muslim Brotherhood does not "reside" is being naive or blind or both.

Bachmann's Allegations on Clinton - Jewish Defense - Why?

Congresswoman Bachmann is attacked for asking questions about Muslim Brotherhood at the heart of American National power -- Huma Abadin as the number one aid to Hillary Clinton, America's Secretary of State. 

Allegations on Clinton ... JPost - Jewish World - Jewish Features.

In the article above, who is doing the attacking: old line Jewish organizations who still believe that Islam is just a run of the mill religion -- the religion of peace.  That is just factually not the case.  As America and many other countries have found out, Islam is at the center of all attacks on the West and the modern world. 

What Congresswoman Bachmann brought up should be lauded, not attacked under the umbrella of political correctness.  The same attacks that are being made on Bachmann today, the political correctness and Islam is a peaceful religion, got us 9/11.  How can Bachmann be criticized?   Have we really learned nothing from our past 12 years of negative experiences.

There is every reason for Jews to question Clinton and support Congresswoman Bachmann?  Who has consistently supported Israel?  Not Clinton -- as First Lady she embraced the PLO and Arafat.  As Secretary of State, she has pushed Israel and its leaders impolitely more than even Obama himself has.   Why would anyone think that somehow Huma Abadin is beyond reproach?

Abadin's whole family is part of the Muslim Brotherhood.  Is it not a fair question to ask: how has she distanced herself from them?  If she has.  Anyone else who would have done what she has, including marrying a Jew, would have had a death fatwa issued against them at least once.  Why not her?  It would only have happened if she is of value to the Muslim Brotherhood where she is -- and she is of value to them.   Congresswoman Bachmann only asked the question of how much value.  That this is deserving of investigation.

The mainstream Jewish organizations are so afraid of being considered as being politically incorrect that they are willing, maybe unconciously, to risk the Jewish State for their belongingness. 

The simple question for Huma Abadin is what is you Islamic affiliation?  If there are any, which tenants do you accept?  For most Muslims in the world the tenants would include Islamic anti-Jewishness and anti-Americanism.  How is she different when her whole family support these very tenants?  Why, Senator McCain, is this question not allowed? 

What if Chick-fil-A was Owned by Muslims? The Culture Wars are Real.

The culture wars are alive and well.  In spite of reams of articles and books attempting to argue otherwise, reality creeps in to show us how divided as a nation we remain.  The newness of this culture war is reflected by a complete divide between those who accept the values of America and those who do not.  Recent studies have further shown that as students graduate from high school there acceptance of the First Amendment and tolerance is extremely low.  What is threatening to our national values is that these same students, interviewed after completion of college, further reduce their tolerance in their support of free speech and freedom of conscience.

Yesterday was Chick-fil-A appreciation day.  Throughout the United States hundred of thousands of supporters came out to support the argument against gay marriage rights of the CEO of Chick-fil-A.  What he essentially said is that there is no place in America for marriage between the same gender.  It is an oxymoron.  This cultural division is not only reflected in this singular event; but also in all the opinion polls.  In addition, wherever it has been voted on, the majority of Americans have rejected "gay marriage."  What is important to understand is that Chick-fil-A's CEO and the majority of Americans reject marriage between people of the same gender; but, most of them DO NOT reject the extension of civil rights to gays.

BUT, what if the CEO of Chick-fil-A was a practicing Muslim?  First, he would have to agree with everything that the Christian CEO of Chick-fil-A said about "gay marriage" as being an affront to G-d.   But in Islam it is more than that.  To be an affront to G-d is a blasphemy that requires the punishment of death.  For Islam, under Sharia Law, the only answer to being gay is death.  The issue of "gay marriage" does not even arise in Islam because it lacks any basis in reality.   You cannot have a religious acceptance of what does not exist. 

For Muslims, the solution to the problem of "gayness" is the end of any civil rights, i.e. First Amendment rights, to those tainted individuals.  Christians can say, in the worst case, "hate the sin; but, love the sinner."  There is not comparable concept in Islam.   In Islam, as is practiced by law in ALL Islamic countries, to be gay is to be dead, either by law or by family -- the religion does not care.  This is a far cry from debating the issue of how is marriage to be defined. 

The sole "evil" that Chick-fil-A is accused of is not having a gay acceptable definition of marriage.  Chick-fil-A's understanding of marriage is supported by over half of all Americans -- nothing strange about it.  But, all Muslim CEO's belief must be that gays must be eradicated.  (From a theological point of view, there is probably some difference about how gays would be treated if one is a Muslim gay or an infidel gay.)  Nonetheless, the perspective of a Muslim CEO concerning gays remains death or castration.

The Shariah Law of Islam is not the central point.  The significance is the selective treatment by politicians in the United States of Christians as opposed to Muslims.   This hypocrisy is illustrated remarkably well by the mayors of Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago, etc.  The liberal Democrats continues their hypocritical rejection of all things Christian and a love affair with all things Muslim. 

If one is going to have an issue with what a Christian head of a corporation believes and makes known publicly, then there is no basis whatsoever for allowing any business to be carried on by a Muslim who has any religious belief and practices.  When the Mayor of Chicago, Rahm Emanuel, said "the values of Chick-fil-A's CEO are not Chicago's values," what does he say about all the Muslims running businesses and corporations in Chicago whose religion calls and demands the denial of all civil rights to gays?  Are these Chicago's values?  To be consistent, the Mayors and the Democratic Party needs to reject all practicing Muslims.  Or alternatively, have Muslims give up Sharia Law as being inherently un-American.

The liberal Democrats love affair with Islam will continue to America's detriment.  Christianity will continue to be denied and demonized by these same liberals.  The fight for factual honesty and the end of hypocrisy must be joined and fought by all who believe in the legitimacy of the First Amendment to the American Constitution.

Related articles

Chick-Fil-A packed as supporters turn out

Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day: Half A Million To Show Up At Restaurants

Tweet of the Day: Chick-fil-A and Barack Obama

Boston Mayor: Chick-fil-A, Move Along

Americans flock to support Chick-fil-A

Presbyterians reject divestment: Israel's Loss

The Presbyterian Church "decided" not to divest from companies doing business with Israel by a minuscule .03% margin.  If the divestment was approved, the Presbyterian Church would have decided that Israel was so evil that the only proper reaction would have to equal that which was done to the white regime in South Africa, and, by the way, was not done to Nazi Germany.  This is not even something that is being done to countries like Saudi Arabia. which ban all churches and all Christians, Jews, etc.

This was not a win.  Just by making it an issue, Israel made any result a defeat.  What needed to be done to win is for Israel to vote a ban of all relations with the Presbyterian Church for being an antisemitic organization.  If divestment was a new or unique phenomena, then it would make sense to expend time and effort on defeating this move.  But it has been the contrary.  The Presbyterians know it.  As a consequence, they have been acting as though they still matter as a religion, which they do not.

I find it very ironic that the Jewish organizations, the usual old-line organizations that are still fighting WWII antisemitism, care this much about such a defunct and useless organization as the Presbyterians.  Why?  What can they do?  Are they going to divest from cell phones? or IM? Not a chance.  Even the Arabs decided to look the other way. 

Israel must start taking charge and begin acting like a "mensch."  Israel and the Jewish Community has been groveling and begging these "Christians" to please accept me, take me in, love me.  It is degrading for Jews and it is unbecoming for any nation.

It is ironic because it would be impossible to get this kind of support, as a matter of fact almost any support, from these same Jewish and Israeli organizations to work at gaining support from the Evangelical Christians.  Why would anyone care about a church that is going out of business, while rejecting the future direction of Christianity.  The future is with the Evangelical Christians and they do not operate as monolith and by far a majority are pro-Zionist. 

CUFI, Christians United For Israel, which is Pastor John Haggee's Evangelical Christian group, is so pro-Israel, they almost put AIPAC to shame.  And yet, you will not find any mainline Jews or Jewish organizations supporting them.  They are having there annual meeting this summer, about now, and there is not a single piece of information available anywhere about them in any Jewish magazine, journal, or newspaper.  Why?

This failure of Jews to support their friends and reject antisemitism will be the 21st Century's equivalent of their bad behavior in the 1930s.  The Jews love the the Presbyterians for what they used to be: a pro-Jewish religion in the 1930s.  It is also still known as the academic religion because if it infusion with higher education since the Church has no set religious standards.  It has become post-modern through it individual oriented theology.  Many Jews love this because they realize that the Presbyterians really do not have a religion that is substantive and so they really cannot care about how substantive the Jew's religion is.

This is not the 1930s and academia is not the playing field.  Israel is not a powerful state and this is being organized ont he political level, using academia; but not of it.  Israel needs to provide political and international force behind the substantiation of its own legitimacy.  What nation would be considered "legitimate" that cared about the support of a vanishing organization for its justification?  That is how Israel is behaving.

Israel and American Jews need to take the initiative on all such issues and reject the premise that there is any consequence to whatever the Presbyterian Church decides to do.  Israel and the Jews are now one and have their own Country.  Thanks Presbyterians; but, this is not WWII and we will not be treated as such any longer.

 

JUF News : Presbyterians reject divestment from Israel.

Related articles

• US Presbyterians Reject Israel Divestment (abcnews.go.com)
• Presbyterians debate Israel divestment (content.usatoday.com)
• US Presbyterians reject Israel divestment (sfgate.com)
• Narrow BDS Defeat Nothing to Celebrate (commentarymagazine.com)
• In Close Vote, Presbyterian Church Rejects Divesting in Firms That Aid Israeli Occupation (nytimes.com)

Professor Sues Purdue for Violation of his Free Speech Rights on Islam | FrontPage Magazine

Frontpage magazine and Jamie Glasov did a wonderful job of interviewing me and getting out the issues that "got me here."  You can read about this in the following link:

Professor Sues Purdue for Violation of his Free Speech Rights on Islam | FrontPage Magazine.

I have to say that the only issue that needs to be further understood is that I, and honestly some others, have been fighting this battle for over 19 years on campus.  If you are not a Muslim, but religious, if you are pro-Israel, if you are right of center politically, you will constantly be harrassed, intimidated, and demonized on almost all of our universities. 

What is sad is that most of this is being done with our own tax dollars.

This is what the people of America need to understand very, very quickly.  The Muslims and their liberal allies are attacking religion, not Islam of course, and undermining the First Amendment, using your money.  All state institutions need to immediately audit their state universities for their usage of funds and their rules and regulations that permit Muslims to undermine the First Amendment and replace it with their version of Sharia Law. 

How is this done?  Very simply -- in Islam being "offended" is a legal term.  You are not allowed to "offend" Islam or Mohammad.  It is punishable in a variety of ways up to and including execution.  In the United States, offending someone is a badge of honor especially at a university.  To paraphrase a man who knows much about higher education and the First Amendment, Adam Kissel of FIRE, if you, a student, are not being offended once a week, someone is cheating you out of an education.

That is the fight I have to finish.

Chancellor Keon and the Board of Trustees Have Approved the End of Free Speech

At Purdue University, it is Chancellor Keon with the approval of President Cordova and the Board of Trustees who are attacking and demeaning the Constitutional First Amendment.  If you are disgusted by these activities, and those described in my last blog entry, then contact State Representative Sheila Klinker at 1-800-382-9842.   She is the State Reperesentative who "carries the water" for Purdue University. 

She not only represents the University and their interests, she is also employed by the University.  She is the important person that makes all of this happen.  She can also challenge the abuse of the Administration of Purdue University of the First Amendment.

Here is her letter to me: Dr. eisenstein, FIRE and 1st amend from Rep. Klinker

That was her only communication -- she was ready to investigate.  The result of her inquiry seems to have been an increased attack on my free speech.