American Media Ignoring the Truth about the U.S. and Sodomy

Written by Paul Hair on February 9, 2014

Politically conservative people always can be counted on to do one thing: accept premises that the left sets and fight any effort to undo them. This holds true for sexual morality. That’s why more and more conservative figures are denouncing a Russian law that protects children. That’s why they issue ultimatums about having no friendship with anyone who opposes sodomy. And that’s also probably why they are ignoring the truth about the atrocities that America is committing against children and Christians inside the U.S.

A certain conservative pundit highlighted a Russian comedian saying that Russia should execute sodomites. This was supposed to be a prime example of just how bad things are in Russia. But it actually is a terrible example. People say controversial things in the U.S., too. Megan Fox voiced a desire to wipe out the “anti-gay” people in the U.S. and sodomite Michael Swift wrote an “outré” of some of the worst things imaginable. Even worse, Americans don’t just talk about rounding people up and executing them; we actually do it. It’s called abortion.

But if people still want to think that what one Russian comedian said is a horrible thing it still doesn’t compare to how American politicians—people who actually make laws—treat children and Christians living in the U.S.

For instance, Houston mayor Annise Parker is a sodomite and anti-Christian extremist. She used the mayoral office to attempt to violate the law to favor sodomites and subvert Christianity (“Judge: Houston Mayor, City Must ‘Cease and Desist’ Recognizing Same-Sex Marriage and Providing Benefits” – Texas Values, December 2013).

And then there was the “Gay Human Rights Commissioner to Evangelical pastor: you and your family ‘deserve to burn in hell’” (LifeSiteNews, July 2013). This was a sodomite American political appointee who directly confronted one of his Christian constituents with violent rhetoric. Where was the outrage over this from conservative pundits? contributor Matt Barber reported on a sodomite New Jersey lawmaker who threatened to take the children of Christians. The outrageousness of the threat becomes even worse when considering that the lawmaker was a sponsor of a bill that bans anyone from offering therapy to children who have same-sex attractions. Barber wrote the following in, “‘Gay’ lawmaker to Christians: ‘We’ll take your children’” (WND, 2013):

Things get more sinister yet. On Wednesday, New Jersey Assemblyman Tim Eustace, who sponsored the bill and is openly homosexual, bombastically compared change therapy to “beating a child” and suggested that the government take children seeking change away from their parents. He told Talk Radio 1210 WPHT, “What this does is prevent things that are harmful to people. If a parent were beating their child on a regular basis we would step in and remove that child from the house. If you pay somebody to beat your child or abuse your child, what’s the difference?”

Mat Staver responded on the same program: “It is shocking to hear the law’s sponsor threaten parents that the state will remove their children from them if they provide the counsel they need and which helps them. This is the ultimate nanny state,” he said.

But big name conservative pundits never responded to this. Why not? That lawmaker’s threat very well could come true one day. A recent legal ruling foreshadows this possibility.

The federal Ninth Circuit court ruled that California lawmakers were right in their banning anyone from trying to help children overcome sexual sin. The Volokh Conspiracy, a legal blog appearing at The Washington Post, agreed with that decision and had this to say on the matter in, “A constitutional right to ‘cure’ gays? No way, says the Ninth Circuit” (January 2014):

It’s true that the line between constitutionally protected advocacy and fully regulable treatment by licensed professionals can be difficult to draw. But to say that counseling is absolutely protected speech because it consists of talking is to say that there can be little or no regulation of what mental health professionals do to their patients. The Constitution protects political and religious quackery, but not quackery administered to vulnerable minors under the guise of treatment for something that is not a sickness.

So the legal system is already on the side of the sodomites and the path towards taking children from Christian parents is being paved. This becomes even more apparent when the legal system shows how little care it has for people who do legally questionable things in the name of the sodomite agenda. [For instance, The Daily Mail reported back in 2012 on United States doctors breaking the law to “sex change” children (“The doctors defying the FDA by prescribing transgender kids with puberty-suppressing drugs to help change their lives”). I have never heard any outrage over this.]

Conservative pundits should stop joining with the truthaphobic left in denouncing Russia for its efforts to protect children. Instead, they should call out the evil going on in America as the U.S. becomes more oppressive and commits increasing amounts of evil against its own children and Christians.

Paul Hair honorably served in the U.S. Army Reserve as a non-commissioned officer; he is veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom. He has worked as a civilian in both the government and private sectors. His writings have appeared at various websites. Paul now runs The Security and Culture Intelligencer website ( and is an independent consultant for Wikistrat, a strategic analysis and forecasting network. Connect with him at the S&CI website and on Twitter at @PaulHair1.

Image: Courtesy of:

Paul Hair
Paul Hair is an author and national security/intelligence expert. He writes fiction and nonfiction under his own name and as a ghostwriter. He provides his national security and intelligence insight as a freelance consultant. Connect with him at Contact him at if you are interested in his professional services.