When even Republican senators are too afraid to host a Christian film, it’s not just a cancellation—it’s a crisis of courage.
We expected backlash. We expected protests. We even expected the mainstream media to attack our film.
But what we didn’t expect—and what shocked us to the core—was being canceled by one of our own, a move that left us all in disbelief.
This June, our Christian Action Network was scheduled to premiere our new documentary, Stolen Rainbow, in the Senate Hart Office Building. We had submitted the request, received a positive response from Senator Rick Scott’s office, and were preparing to launch the film just steps from the U.S. Capitol.
Then—without warning—Senator Rick Scott pulled the plug.
Let me be clear: this wasn’t a misunderstanding, this wasn’t a double booking, and it certainly wasn’t because of a lack of space.
Here’s what we received from Elli Dalton, Sen. Scott’s scheduler, on March 14 in response to our room request:
“Thank you for sending this request. I will work on this and circle back with any availability!”
Though not using the word “approved,” that response is effectively a green light. Anyone familiar with Senate building operations knows that finding a room for a June event with that much notice is not an issue. After that message, we began preparing for the screening.
But three weeks passed. No updates. No room number. No response.
So, we followed up. And that’s when the door slammed shut.
On April 3, we received this:
“I’m so sorry, we do not expect to be able to accommodate this room request. We will let you know if anything changes but I suggest reaching out to a different office. I apologize for the inconvenience.”
No explanation. No clarification. And most telling of all: no mention of room unavailability.
We replied graciously, even offering flexibility in the timing—any day, any month.
But we never heard back. We were ghosted like a 16-year-old girl on prom night.
This was not a scheduling issue.
This was a decision—and a deliberate one. A decision that could have been communicated weeks earlier.
Instead, they left us rotting like an overripe banana and then had the audacity to suggest we “reach out to a different office,” something they could easily have told us back in March, giving us more time to reach “a different office.”
So What Happened?
Let me be blunt: Stolen Rainbow isn’t “hateful,” “homophobic,” or “extremist.” It’s a factual, hard-hitting documentary that exposes how the LGBT movement hijacked the rainbow, rewrote history, and pushed a radical agenda that’s targeting America’s children under the false flag of love and inclusion.
It’s bold—but it’s the truth.
And apparently, the truth is now too dangerous for the U.S. Senate.
It’s packed with facts, testimony, and courage—exactly the kind of message that will panic both activist groups and (apparently) Republican senators.
It’s no stretch to believe that political pressure—perhaps even from within his own office—pushed Senator Scott to revoke our reservation. But instead of standing strong, he chose silence, safety, and walking away from the fight.
And by doing so, he handed the radical left exactly what they wanted: a Christian voice silenced on Capitol Hill.
The GOP’s Culture War Retreat?
Senator Scott’s actions raise a bigger question: What’s happening to the conservative movement?
When even Republican senators refuse to host a film exposing the LGBT agenda—when they quietly step back rather than stand up—who’s left to defend truth?
The message to Christians is loud and clear: Don’t count on Capitol Hill.
If the Senate Won’t Hear It, We’ll Take It to the People
We’re not quitting. If Senator Scott won’t host Stolen Rainbow, then we’ll find a venue that will. A different Member of Congress. A theater. A church. A public square.
We will show this film.
Because if the rainbow has been stolen, we’re going to take it back—one heart, one screen, one stand at a time.
But we can’t do it alone. We need your help to make this happen.
Help Us Stand Where Others Backed Down
We’re working now to reschedule the premiere—possibly at a nearby venue in Washington, D.C.—and to launch a bold nationwide campaign to ensure this film reaches families, pastors, and educators across America.
If you’re tired of Christian voices being silenced—even by so-called conservatives—then stand with us. We’re not giving up. We’re taking Stolen Rainbow directly to the people.
But we need your help to do it.
Click the donate button below to help us reschedule the premiere, launch a national campaign, and make sure this film is seen—loudly and unapologetically—across America.
Because if we don’t speak up now… who will?
AUTHOR
Martin Mawyer
Martin Mawyer is president of the Christian Action Network, which he founded in 1990. Located in Lynchburg, VA, CAN was formed as a non-profit educational organization to protect America’s religious and moral heritage. He is the author of several books, including You Are Chosen: Prepare to Triumph in a Fallen World.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Majority Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMajority Report2025-04-11 13:55:532025-04-11 14:29:14Why Senator Rick Scott Shut Down Our Christian Film About the LGBT Agenda
Marketing campaigns are, it is generally recognized, an attempt to sell a particular product or service. This can be done in any number of ways, from presenting a product as enticing to showcasing the necessity of a product to using humor or star power to generate appeal. In almost all cases, however, it is advisable to feature the product itself in one’s marketing campaigns. World-renowned automobile manufacturer Jaguar has, as of late, opted to disregard this latter standard — or, indeed, any of the aforementioned standards — and debuted a new marketing campaign comprised solely of the bizarre.
In addition to unveiling a new logo — which noticeably does not feature the company’s iconic, eponymous, pouncing big cat — Jaguar launched a new ad this week. The ad featured a host of androgynous individuals clad in brightly-colored outfits of a design so strange that the denizens of the Capitol in “The Hunger Games” appear commonplace and well-adjusted.
The ad features an Asian man wearing a yellow tank top and matching vinyl tutu, a black man (I am presuming that it is a man, anyway) sporting an afro that seems to be missing an entire quarter of itself and wearing a skintight red bodysuit with furry boots that look as though they could have been designed by Dr. Seuss in delirium, a black woman with a shaved head wearing a dress that resembles badly-arranged tissue paper sticking out of the top of a gift bag, a man who looks alarmingly similar to actress Tilda Swinton and is clothed in a garish orange dress seemingly made of rubber, and a whole cast of other bizarre figures of unsettling appearance and uncertain gender. The ad also features large pink rocks, upside-down rooms, and the brightest yellow elevator doors one could envision. What the ad does not feature is a Jaguar.
It wasn’t always this way, of course. Jaguar was once reputed for making the coolest cars ever, and everyone knew it. James Bond drove a Jaguar (2002’s “Die Another Day” and 2015’s “Spectre” are prime examples); a Jaguar made a memorable appearance in the “Fast and Furious” franchise; and pop stars from Jay Z to Lana Del Rey have featured the car in their glamorous music videos.
In 2015, less than 10 years ago, Jaguar launched an ad campaign headlined by English movie stars Ben Kinglsey, Mark Strong, and Tom Hiddleston, all three of whom are known for playing villains. As Strong and Hiddleston race to a luxurious mansion, Strong behind the wheel of a Jaguar and Hiddleston being outpaced in a helicopter, the trio of actors discuss the English heritage of the Jaguar and why Brits make such excellent movie villains. As Strong and Hiddleston arrive at the mansion, Kingsley, having freshly donned a sleek bow tie and dinner jacket, intones, “Oh, yes. It’s good to be bad.”
That ad campaign understood who the buyer is and what he’s looking for. Nobody buys a Jaguar because it’s affordable or convenient or fuel efficient. People buy Jaguars because they’re cool, sleek, seductive, and powerful. Movie villains, especially the sort portrayed by the likes of Kingsley, Strong, and Hiddleston, exude the very elegance, power, and affluence that Jaguar was once synonymous with. Besides, watching three big-name actors race helicopters and luxury cars to a veritable palace laden with high-tech security measures is simply cool.
In another series of ads, Hiddleston compared the revving of a Jaguar’s engine to the authority of an English movie villain’s voice and the car’s advanced technology to the sort of gadgetry that one would expect from a Bond film. In an age where patriotism and national pride are practically verboten, especially in Europe, it seems almost shocking to think that Jaguar’s ads even included a monologue from William Shakespeare’s “Richard II,” praising the English nation and the men who made her.
The simple fact is that Jaguar used to be cool. Whatever the company’s new logo and ad campaign may be — bizarre, indecipherable, amorphous, woke — they are not cool. Woke is the opposite of cool. Cool sells, woke doesn’t. Countless corporate titans have evidently learned their lessons when it comes to handling the poison known as woke. Bud Light, Tractor Supply, John Deere, Lowe’s, Rip Curl, and numerous other brands and retailers have discovered that vociferously promoting LGBT ideology is a death sentence for corporate profits. Jaguar may simply be late to the game, but the car manufacturer will also learn this lesson.
James Bond speeding along the cliffs of the Amalfi coast with a truckload of armed and uniformed villains in hot pursuit is cool. Bruce Wayne leaving his Gotham City penthouse and racing through the streets to reach the Batcave is cool. Jason Bourne evading CIA goons and tearing through downtown New York City is cool. Dirty Harry chasing a crazed criminal down the California freeway is cool. A man in a dress is not cool. A morbidly obese woman is not cool. Woke is not cool. Jaguar has chosen to abandon its heritage and the image of “cool” with which the company has become almost synonymous in favor of woke.
At its core, woke is the infantile, futile attempt to subvert and alter reality without any real effort. A man declaring himself a woman can never change the incontrovertible fact of his biological makeup by donning a pair of high heels and lecturing others about his new pronouns. This is also why woke is so obnoxious, so blatant, and so “in your face.” Reality needs no filter to be understood as reality; a six-foot-tall man with a big beard and a burly chest does not need to clarify that he is a man, it is simply understood.
But a six-foot-tall man in a ballgown has to tell others that he identifies as a woman and demands to be called “she” and “her,” because his subversion or alteration of reality is so clearly contradictory to reality; he cannot just be a six-foot-tall man in a dress, which is what reality denotes to the casual observer. Woke needs filters, it must filter reality through its own series of lenses in order to present its own distorted replication of reality; it can never simply rely on reality.
Cool, on the other hand, is rooted in reality. Unlike woke, it needs no filters. One need not be lectured about the emotional science of sound to get a slight thrill when a powerful engine roars to life beneath the hood. One need not have gone through excitement management training courses in order to cheer when an athlete pulls off a seemingly impossible feat. Cool is unafraid of itself, it presents itself simply, as part of the fabric of reality. Another thing: cool sells.
Whether it’s Jaguar or some other corporation, any conglomerate that goes woke is not doing so in order to market a product. This is a common (although well-meaning) misconception among many on the Right; we assume, based on our own mindset and goodwill, that these corporations and companies mistakenly believe that they will appeal to an evolving population of consumers and increase profits. This is not correct. These companies are, with few — if any — exceptions, not hurting for money, and most have the experience and history to know how to maintain and increase profits.
They are not promoting a product, they are promoting an ideology. Retail department stores do not sell rainbow Pride flag onesies because market research shows a sudden demand for LGBT-themed apparel among two-year-olds: they do so in the hope that the moms and dads who actually shop for their two-year-olds will believe that introducing toddlers to LGBT ideology is normal — or at least popular. Children’s entertainment companies do not introduce new characters with “they/them” pronouns and same-sex partners because they believe that five- and six-year-old viewers are craving LGBT representation: they do so in an effort to introduce children to ideas that would have otherwise never occurred to them, and to invite the children to question the ideas with which they have been raised.
In the end, woke is not a marketing technique or ploy, it is an act of ideological warfare. Jaguar is not on a sudden quest to sell its cars exclusively to they/thems and androgynous ethnic minorities. No, the automobile manufacturer is trying to replace its carefully-curated cool image with woke, and is hoping that everyone will mistake the former for the latter. If Jaguar is cool and Jaguar is woke, then woke must be cool, right?
But the filters have been falling over the past few years, like scales from one’s eyes. Jaguar may find that it has arrived to the woke party a little too late. While it’s true that none of these major corporations is quite hurting for money, everybody who’s sick to their stomachs of the incessant whining, labeling, and filtering necessitated by woke may just decide to make these corporations hurt for money.
The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2024-11-22 06:06:102024-11-22 06:06:10Jaguar Rebranded: The Woke War against Normal
Transgender activists using litigation to push child sex changes simultaneously sponsor an organization that teaches judges to view cases through the lens of gender ideology.
The Judicial Education Program at UCLA School of Law’s Williams Institute partners with courts and judicial associations across the country to provide trainings that persuade judges to bring gender ideology into the courtroom, offering primers on the spectrum of sexual identities and suggesting they use pronouns when introducing themselves.
Meanwhile, its donors and corporate sponsors have for years been on the frontlines of lawsuits advancing LGBT causes, from legalizing same-sex marriage to opposing state child sex change bans.
Richard Painter, former chief White House ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush, told the Daily Caller News Foundation he has “long called upon federal judges not to attend subject specific ‘training’ and ‘education’ programs” like the ones offered by Williams Institute.
“Judges can learn about subjects such as LGBT issues and economics on their own without ‘training’ funded by lawyers who argue cases in front of them or organizations that are parties to cases before them,” Painter told the DCNF. “In screening potential Supreme Court nominees for ethics issues, I remember asking about attendance at such ‘free’ seminars.”
One of the reasons Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito passed ethics clearance for appointment to the Supreme Court is because they did not participate in these kinds of programs, Painter noted.
Thousands of judges and their staffs have encountered training material produced by the Williams Institute.
Todd Brower, director of the Judicial Education Program at the Williams Institute, wrote in a 2019 letter to the House Judiciary Committee that he has trained “over 5000 judges, court staff and related court professionals from virtually every state in the United States on sexual orientation and gender identity issues for nearly 15 years.”
The institute’s Judicial Education Program, which operates alongside the International Association of LGBTQ+ Judges and the LGBTQ Bar Association, has offered trainings at venues including the New Mexico Judicial Conference, National Association of State Judicial Educators and National Judicial College, according to its website.
Brower taught a webinar for Ohio court personnel in November 2022 titled, “Sexual Identity and Gender Identity in the Courts,” according to a list previously obtained by the DCNF. He taught a course on incorporating pronoun usage and an awareness of gender identity into the courtroom at the Nevada Supreme Court in July 2023, the DCNF previously reported.
The institute was also involved in a May 2023 “Pride & Pronouns” training hosted at the Superior Court of Santa Cruz County.
This work, along with the institute’s research, is funded by several major law firms that do pro bono work to support LGBT-related activist litigation, from opposing child sex-change bans in red states to filing amicus briefs in key Supreme Court cases, according to a packet listing current and former sponsors.
“When a group like UCLA’s Williams Institute or the Climate Judiciary Project, for example, seeks behind-the-scenes access to judges, it is worth asking questions about the group’s funding and sponsors,” Carrie Severino, president of the conservative legal advocacy group JCN, told the DCNF. “Who are the sponsors we don’t know about? Why is the group interested in conducting such a training?”
One sponsor, Covington & Burling, records that it spent 10,200 pro bono hours in 2023 on LGBTQ+ matters, including leading an effort by medical associations to oppose child-sex change bans by filing amicus briefs in cases challenging the red state laws.
The firm represented the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) in a case challenging Alabama’s ban on child sex changes. Discovery in the Alabama case revealed WPATH allowed political concerns to influence its Standards of Care (SOC-8) guidelines, succumbing to pressure from the Biden administration and “social justice lawyers.”
Two firms, Akin Gump and Sidley Austin, were part of an effort launched in 2019 with the Human Rights Campaign to bring strategic litigation to “combat the relentless attacks on LGBTQ equality by the Trump-Pence administration.”
Akin Gump joined the American Civil Liberties Union, Lambda Legal and another firm to challenge Tennessee’s ban on child sex change procedures last year.
The Supreme Court will consider the Biden administration’s challenge to the same Tennessee law this term.
Another sponsor, Baker McKenzie, partnered with Lambda Legal and the Southern Poverty Law Center to fight Florida’s Parental Rights in Education bill in court. The firm received an award from the LGBT advocacy group Stonewall for its litigation to “support and advance opportunities for LGBTQ+ young people across the country.”
The law firm Sheppard Mullin Richter serves as the national pro bono counsel for the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), meaning its attorneys “regularly attend board meetings and represent the GLAAD when litigation arises,” according to the firm’s website.
Latham & Watkins helped the Williams Institute file its amicus brief in the Obergefell v. Hodges Supreme Court case, which legalized same-sex marriage. Research from the brief was ultimately cited in the ruling.
Other firms that support the Williams Institute and engage in pro bono LGBT litigation include Kirkland & Ellis, Munger, Tolles & Olson and O’Melveny & Myers,
The Williams Institute operates with an over $4.5 million annual budget, according to its website.
“The funding of such ‘training’ of judges by law firms with a stake in LGBTQ-related case outcomes doesn’t pass the smell test,” Sarah Parshall Perry, senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, told the DCNF. “And frankly, it would also be a violation of the lawyer’s code of professional ethics to allow private law firms to sponsor these one-sided trainings designed to reach preferred courtroom outcomes.”
These kinds of training are why state courts “have been overtaken by the despotism of ideological newspeak,” she said.
“Within the domestic relations field, for example, there have been increasingly problematic determinations from state judges on issues such a child custody, when a parent who does not automatically affirm a minor child’s expression of gender identity is subsequently divested of custody under the auspices that automatic affirmation by the other parent would be in the child’s ‘best interest,’” Perry said.
EXCLUSIVE: Biden-Harris Admin Paves Way For Bureaucrats To Take Gender-Confused Kids From ‘Non-Affirming’ Parents 🧵 pic.twitter.com/1ezojfWBxU
The Williams Institute is tied to organizations that spearheaded the push for child gender transitions.
The institute’s faculty advisory committee now includes Jillian T. Weiss, executive director of Transgender Legal Defense & Education, and Mark Schuster, CEO of the Kaiser Permanente School of Medicine in California.
Multipledetransitioners, such as Chloe Cole, have sued Kaiser Permanente for administering sex-change procedures like puberty blockers and double mastectomies to them as children.
The institute’s nonprofit donors backed the legal and medical groups that helped erase safeguards for children.
The Chicago-based Tawani Foundation, founded by transgender activist Jennifer (formerly James) Pritzker, has given the Williams Institute more than $1.4 million since 2018, according to tax documents.
Pritzker, a father and retired army lieutenant colonel who now identifies as a woman, is a major funder of WPATH. He received a philanthropy award from the organization for offering “longstanding support” and aid to produce the SOC8 guidelines.
Court documents unsealed in a case challenging Alabama’s ban on sex change procedures for minors revealed WPATH avoided evidence reviews for its SOC8 guidelines on the advice of “social justice” attorneys. Assistant Secretary for Health Rachel Levine also successfully pressured WPATH to remove its minimum age recommendations.
The Tawani Foundation awarded $275,000 to WPATH between 2019 and 2020, tax records show.
The foundation also funds a slew of LGBT litigation efforts. Since 2018, it has awarded the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund $437,500, the National Center for Transgender Equality $125,000 and $100,000 to GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, per tax records.
The San Francisco-based Evelyn & Walter Haas, Jr. Fund has given the Williams Institute $282,500 since 2016. Over the same time period, it awarded nearly $1.27 million to the National Center for Transgender Equality, $1.08 million to the Transgender Law Center, $80,000 to the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund, $1.7 million to the National Center For Lesbian Rights and $435,500 to Lambda Legal, per tax records.
The left-wing Tides Center works with and financially sponsors the fund’s Haas Leadership Initiatives program, which offers grants to organizations to support litigation that increases “the legal privileges of LGBT people,” according to Influence Watch.
The Williams Institute has also received a total of $283,348 from the David Bohnett Foundation since 2004, according to grants reported on its website. Most recently, the organization gave $5,000 for its 2024 gala.
Bohnett Foundation president Michael Fleming is married to his same-sex partner, California Court of Appeal Justice Luis A. Lavin, according to his bio. Lavin spoke at the Williams Institute’s LGBTQ Bench webinar in 2021.
The David Bohnett Foundation has donated to various other groups pushing cases through the legal system, such as the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund, the Transgender Law Center, Lambda Legal and the National Center for Lesbian Rights.
The Williams Institute, Covington & Burling, Akin Gump, Sidley Austin, Baker McKenzie, Sheppard Mullin Richter, Latham & Watkins, Kirkland & Ellis, Munger, Tolles & Olson and O’Melveny & Myers did not respond to requests for comment. Pritzker also did not respond to a request for comment.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2024-11-20 05:57:102024-11-20 06:11:33Top Law Firms Backing Child Sex Changes Funneled Money Into Org That Trains Judges On Gender Ideology
“I surrender,” Marty said, putting his hands up, blood streaking down his cheek, “You got me good.”
Marty, according to Joshua Mundy and Jay Carnicom, allegedly arrived at in the Days Inn parking lot in Fort Wayne, Indiana, that day to meet a 13-year-old girl for sex. Instead, he met Dads Against Predators (DAP), an organization that confronts alleged pedophiles and films the encounters for social media.
Public humiliation is the primary MO for the vast majority of vigilante pedophile hunters, but DAP is different. These guys draw blood, often releasing videos where they openly assault their targets. The Marty sting was brutal.
The Daily Caller is withholding images and identification of some alleged predators, including Marty’s video, because some appearing in this story have neither been charged nor convicted of a crime.
A Daily Caller review of dozens of these kinds of videos from various sting groups shows that while exchanges typically get testy, they almost never get violent. For DAP, however, the moment things get testy, they immediately start pounding on their marks.
Carnicom and Mundy had been posing as an underage girl on a dating app, a tactic they’ve deployed hundreds of times, to lure Marty into a public appearance. Once they had Marty out in the open, they confronted him about what they say were a number of inappropriate texts he allegedly sent them.
Mundy began reading Marty’s alleged texts aloud. “‘You’re fucking sexy,’ to a 13-year-old girl,” Mundy recited. “‘I don’t want to go to jail,’” Mundy continued reading. “‘You’re gonna be fine,’ little girl.’”
“You’re calling little girls ‘babe?’” Carnicorn asked.
“Hey! This man is here to meet a 13-year-old girl!” Mundy yelled, a staple shaming tactic Mundy has used hundreds of times throughout his five-year career of catching and exposing alleged pedophiles on the internet.
Marty continued to walk away as the pedophile hunters egged him on to call the police. “Leave me alone,” Marty pleaded before trying to run away. His short dash didn’t last long, as he soon turned around and raised his fists to fight.
The two pedophile hunters, both holding iPhones to record the encounter, quickly accepted the invitation. A storm of punches rained on Marty’s face, opening a large gash under his eye.
DAP informs Marty that the cops are on their way, at which point he flees.
Though the hunters referred Marty’s case to detectives, police in Indiana did not file charges. Years later, he allegedly again unknowingly alerted DAP while they were posing as another underaged girl on a dating app, but Marty left the chat when DAP revealed the girl’s age, DAP alleged.
The Daily Caller reached out to Marty to hear his side of the story but did not hear back by time of publication. Marty is one of many targets of DAP sting operations who did not face criminal charges. The Daily Caller is withholding his full identity since he has neither been charged nor convicted of a crime.
The rapid rise in social media content consumption in the last decade has birthed some unique phenomena: Teenagers now become multi-millionaires by playing video games. Women turn their 15 minutes of fame into lucrative OnlyFans careers. And now, 17 years after the final episode of NBC’s “To Catch A Predator,” online pedophile hunters can publicly shame their targets and share the content to the masses.
Their videos once languished on the back-burner of social media algorithms, a casualty of a censor-happy media climate. Now, as Americans increasingly reject Big Tech censorship, the number of vigilante pedophile hunters are blowing up, reaching users’ feeds across the globe as they watch their follower counts rocket skyward.
Alex Rosen of I Fight For Kids, for instance, has gained significant followings across various platforms. X, however, is where accounts like his and DAP’s have made their biggest strides, particularly in the Elon Musk era.
Rosen’s account, @iFightForKids, has amassed over 315,000 followers. That’s up from 6,500 in July 2022, according to analytics firm SocialBlade.
The numerous online predator hunters deploy markedly different approaches to their craft. Rosen, for example, doesn’t ever lay hands on his targets. DAP, on the other hand, has no problem getting violent.
In one case, Mundy roundhouse kicked an alleged predator in the skull, knocking him out cold.
“I’ve kicked several predators in the face,” Mundy told the Daily Caller.
DAP accuses their targets of soliciting underage children in their videos, but some haven’t been formally charged with a crime. Because of this, the Daily Caller blurred their faces throughout this story and chose not to include or link out to any full videos of the pedophile hunts for legal reasons.
Dads Against Predators’ Joshua Mundy kicks somebody in the face. Screenshot/Twitter/@cxpium
Despite meting out most of the violence, members of DAP have also suffered injuries, at least in one case significant enough for a hospital visit.
“My partner got shot. I had to wrestle a gun from a guy,” Mundy said. “The shot took place so close to his leg, it almost looks like a shotgun blast.”
The widely covered June 2022 incident occurred at a Target department store in Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
“The guy went on a high-speed chase with us after he tried to shoot us. I had to jump on him, wrestle him. It’s a whole thing,” Mundy explained. “It’s hard to even tell the story, because there are some stories in my life … imagine having a ghost story. You don’t like telling it because it sounds fake.”
DAP’s critics wonder how they get away with assaulting their marks, but Mundy said it’s highly unlikely that people caught in vigilante stings would call the cops on him. He told the Caller that cops did arrest him once, but the charges were dropped.
North Carolina police issued warrants for “simple affray” for Mundy and his two colleagues following the Target shooting, according to My Fox 8.
“The number one question I hear all the time is, ‘How do you get away with hitting them?’ But the reality is [for] assault … they gotta press charges. They gotta call the cops, right? So I can call the cops, report my stuff and send the police my videos. All the time the police ask for my videos, and obviously I’m smacking predators in these videos, but the police can’t watch the video and be like, ‘He’s hitting somebody, so that’s assault,’ or else they would charge everybody on WWE with assault every Monday,” Mundy said.
“Even if they press charges, okay, I bond out. I get a lawyer. I fight it. Now I subpoena them in court. I make them talk about it by the file in court. So I guess there’s ways that they could do it, but I’m always prepared for that,” he concluded.
Dads Against Predators shove a target of a string operation onto the ground in a department store. Screenshot/Twitter/@jaycarnicomdap
Rosen disagrees with this tactic. He argues it leads to a lower conviction rate.
“I think hitting them … don’t get me wrong; I want to murder these people,” Rosen explained. “[But] this society that we’re in, hitting them is the dumbest thing you can do, because all it does is just let them walk.”
“All it takes is a defense attorney saying, ‘Oh, they only lured my guy here because they wanted to get quick, easy views and just slap him around. They don’t even care about questioning the guy.’ So there’s a lot of things that can go wrong.”
Despite his non-violent ethos, Rosen, like Mundy, has also stared down the wrong end of a gun. At least two of his targets have pulled firearms on him, one in Oregon in 2022 and another in June in Massachusetts, he told the Caller.
“The pedo got arrested on a bunch of penalties for that. So I didn’t complain,” Rosen said.
Rosen estimated that of his near-600 busts, police arrested more than 100 of the alleged predators. Some, like 56-year-old Arkansas man Jimmy Dewayne Stevens, go away for a long time. An Arkansas judge sentenced Stevens to 35 years in prison for possession of child pornography after Rosen caught him.
“He was very comfortable with me. He voluntarily went to the station and turned himself in for child pornography,” Rosen said of Stevens. “He got his devices, and he willingly got in the car with me, and I drove him to the station, and he showed the cops his CP [child pornography], and he got arrested,” Rosen relayed.
While Rosen disavows taking a physical approach with his targets, his operations are no less eventful.
“This pedo we caught in Springfield, Missouri, horrible tweaker, skittish, didn’t want to talk to me,” Rosen explained. “Tells me he bought child pornography of seven-year-olds. And then he’s like, ‘You know what? I’m suicidal.’ And at that point I was — I can’t let you go back in or tell me that. So we called 911,” Rosen continued.
“He ends up going into his shed, he gets brass knuckles and a knife and he starts walking down the street. I’m like, ‘What do you have in your hand?’ He tells me, ‘Knife.’ And then he’s like, ‘I’m not gonna use it on you.’ I’m like, ‘Oh shit.’ And then he kneeled down; he put the knife to his neck. And I’m trying to tell him, ‘Drop the knife. Drop the knife.’ And luckily, I stalled him enough the cops came, and he ended up dropping the knife. He’s on a 96-hour hold right now, and they got a hold of his devices, and when they dump them, they’re gonna find pretty nasty shit on there.”
Rosen’s work has caught the attention of figures across the political spectrum. Valentina Gomez, a 25-year-old Republican candidate for Missouri Secretary of State, joined him on the Missouri hunt. Gomez has gone viral in the past for things like encouraging people not to be “weak and gay” and firing a flamethrower to LGBT books.
“I was with Alex and the team the entire time until the pedophile was arrested and taken into custody,” Gomez told the Daily Caller. “We need to bring back public executions for anyone who commits a crime against a child. I’ll be happy to provide the bullets.”
The last public execution in the United States took place in 1936.
Political hoops, however, sometimes limit the reach and scope of what these organizations are able to do, Mundy says.
“When we first started, we were heavily focused on trying to go places to get these guys charged, finding states where the laws … because Ohio, there’s nothing that they can do at all. But if you cross the states out of Michigan, you have more of a chance to get a charge,” Mundy explained. “Because there’s not an actual minor on the phone, to them, it falls under a role play or just pretend, technically. A lot of other states are like that as well.”
Ohio’s Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force corroborated those claims. If a police officer is posing as a minor and a predator attempts to solicit the officer “to engage in sexual conduct with the offender,” that offender can be prosecuted under Ohio’s statute.
It applies if “the other person is a law enforcement officer posing as a person who is less than thirteen years of age, and the offender believes that the other person is less than thirteen years of age or is reckless in that regard,” according to Ohio’s criminal code.
The statute, however, does not apply to civilians posing as minors, David Frattare, the Statewide Commander of Ohio’s ICAC, told the Caller.
Some refer to people like Rosen and Mundy as vigilantes — a label they reject — and say they should leave the job of catching potential pedophiles to the police.
“We’re not vigilantes because we don’t break the law. We gather evidence of a crime; we turn it into the cops,” Rosen told the Caller. “It is no different than me recording a robbery taking place … It gives the cops probable cause to go do their job. And you know, cops will probably say, ‘Oh, well, leave it to us.’ But behind the scenes, so many cops are appreciative of what we do.”
Mundy echoed those sentiments, stating that cops have been overwhelmingly appreciative of his efforts despite public-facing police departments criticizing their operations.
“Is it the cops job? Of course it is, but it’s everybody’s job to come against child predators,” Rosen told the Caller.
Law enforcement, however, noted that rather than helping put pedophiles in prison, vigilantes are often the reason suspects end up walking free.
“Our hands are kind of tied with them, because we can’t use that stuff to prosecute someone. So without finding more evidence or obtaining confessions for other true victims, there’s not much we can do,” a detective with the Goshen Police Department (GPD) in Ohio, who asked not to be identified by name, told the Daily Caller. “Any time that they do [a sting operation] and they don’t report to law enforcement prior to a confrontation, I think that they’re interfering with it.”
The detective referred to a 2022 case where a vigilante group, Predator Catchers Muncie, apparently lured a Goshen School Board president to Indiana and accused him of trying to meet with an 11-year-old girl.
While police responded to the video the predator hunters made, they ultimately did not charge the man.
“[The hunters] did a pretty good job talking with that guy. They got a lot of information that, if we could have used, would have been great in trial, but without getting law enforcement involved, they’re kind of standing in the way,” the Goshen detective told the Caller.
The detective believes the vigilantes are a net benefit to society, noting that they serve as a deterrent for potential predators. He’d like to see them coordinate with law enforcement more, though, rather than take matters into their own hands.
“If we can’t build probable cause for a search warrant because we’re not obtaining the information, then we’ll never know. So there’s potentially victimized people in the past that we would never be able to find out because we can’t use the information obtained from a citizen, and they’re not being held accountable for the pedophilic actions that they’re taking now,” the detective said. Dads Against Predators’ Joshua Mundy shoves a sting target into a bush. Screenshot/Twitter/@jaycarnicomdap
Professor David Finkelhor, Director of the University of New Hampshire’s Crimes against Children Research Center, told the Caller that these vigilantes should stay out of it altogether.
“[Law enforcement] have very strict guidelines and protocols that they observe when they do this to be able to make sure that evidence is clean and that information that they get will not be thrown out in court,” Finkelhor said. “They’re also concerned with conducting their investigations in ways that don’t result in harm to criminals. They don’t want these offenders to be dying by suicide.”
Both Rosen and Mundy told the Caller that targets of their operations have killed themselves after the hunters released their videos on the internet.
“This is tricky business that needs to be left to professionals,” Finkelhor said. “We don’t want to encourage non-professionals to get the idea that finding and catching criminals is really something that they should be doing. The whole basis of our judicial system is really that we turn over this function to a set of professionals and experts, because we want it done well. We want it done impartially. We want it done in ways that can be supervised and where accountability can be served. Once you get freelancers going in this space, all that is lost.”
Dads Against Predators slap a target of a string operation in a department store. Screenshot/Twitter/@jaycarnicomdap
Both Rosen and Mundy said their targets hail “from all walks of life,” but the political left particularly seems to be the side more likely to defend potential predators.
State Democratic lawmakers in Washington also introduced a bill to change the name of the state’s Sex Offender Policy Board to the Sex Offense Policy Board.
Democratic Kentucky State Senator Karen Berg used that language in February while discussing the idea of supplying MAPS with child-sized sex dolls.
Berg did, however, clarify that she voted for a bill that would outlaw sex dolls fashioned to look like children.
Authors like Allyn Walker have tried to draw distinctions between the attraction to children and the act of sexually abusing them.
Walker says it’s a misconception that all MAPS are pedophiles, according to a Rutgers University synopsis of his book, “A Long, Dark Shadow: Minor-Attracted People And Their Pursuit Of Dignity.”
“As Walker discusses, the term ‘pedophile’ refers to a specific age range of attraction, to children who have not yet begun puberty. The attraction to children who are going through puberty is called ‘hebephilia,’ and the attraction to teens/adolescents is described as ‘ephebophilia.’ Walker emphasizes the importance of using correct terms to better understand MAPS’ experiences,” the Rutgers synopsis states.
A 2019 “Nature” study explored potential neurobiological factors in child sex offenders that may explain their behavior.
Moody, however, scoffed at the notion that offenders were attracted to children because of a biological defect, or as he put it, “because they’re missing a protein.”
The Maryland Democratic Party in June removed the chairman of their LGBTQ+ Diversity Leadership Council, Michael Knappen, after Rosen caught him allegedly trying to solicit what he allegedly believed was a 14-year-old boy.
“Obviously every leftist is not a pedophile. We have a lot of them who follow us. But I think the reason why they’re standing up for pedos is because it’s that whole thing of just demonizing the right wing, thinking that we’re all terrible people. So they’ll go to any length just to be right,” Rosen said.
“[They see] one of their fellow leftists in San Francisco in front of a kid; instead of just saying, ‘You know what? Maybe the guy who is wearing the Trump hat might be right about this one,’ they’re like, ‘I can’t agree with him on anything, so I’ll just double down on what my fellow comrades are doing.’ I think that’s why they get to the dichotomy of defending pedophilia. And I think that’s something that the right should exploit way more, because that’s an easy win for independents,” Rosen concluded, alluding to a San Francisco pride parade in June where attendees fellated and urinated on each other at an event open to children.
Mundy said he never travels to a state or area where he isn’t able to catch at least three alleged pedophiles. He believes the issue is one of good and evil.
“I wouldn’t call myself an atheist when I started this, but I was pretty close. I was leaning more atheist than not, and I really believe this is a good and evil thing at this point. I don’t even believe it’s really sexual. I think these are weak individuals, and they allow people to manifest within themselves, and it takes on weird forms. And I believe this is one of the worst.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2024-08-17 14:08:222024-08-17 14:18:16Pedophile Hunters Are Starting To Grow In Popularity. Some Are Taking Justice Into Their Own Hands
Last week, one Democrat in the California State Assembly made a rare public apology — not over a scandal, but over her position on a vote that had taken place the same week. Assembly member Liz Ortega had joined fellow Democrats just a few days earlier in blocking a bill aimed at cracking down on human trafficking of children. The move justifiably made national headlines and garnered widespread criticism. But it shouldn’t take a national controversy for Democrats to vote the right way on something as blatantly evil as the human trafficking of children.
Now, Assemblywoman Ortega says she “made a bad decision,” and in her public apology on Twitter, she wrote, “Voting against legislation targeting really bad people who traffic children was wrong. I regret doing that and I am going to help get this important legislation passed into law.”
On July 11, the California Assembly Committee on Public Safety failed to pass SB-14. The only two Republicans on the committee voted in favor. Yet not a single one of the six Democrats on the committee, including Ortega, voted in favor of the bill, instead making the cowardly decision to abstain from voting at all. The bill had already passed unanimously in the California State Senate in May with bipartisan support.
SB-14 would make “human trafficking of a minor” a “serious felony” under Section 1192.7 of the state’s Penal Code. “Serious” felonies get harsher punishments under California law and are considered “strikes” under California’s “Three Strikes Law.” Eighty-nine nonprofits and organizations and 13 individuals registered their support for the bill (including multiple district attorney’s offices, police departments, and anti-trafficking groups), while only seven groups opposed it. The State of California Department of Justice’s own website states, “California is one of the largest sites of human trafficking in the United States.” Thus, a bill aimed at making the penalty for trafficking children harsher should be something that California Assembly members of both parties can see is necessary.
After originally declining to vote for the bill, Ortega told the Washington Free Beacon, “Sending someone to prison for the rest of their lives is not going to fix the harm moving forward. And that’s the part I’m struggling with. It’s a complex issue.” Ortega’s grave misunderstanding of the criminal justice system was covered over by her with a veneer of compassion. It ignores the fact that putting a trafficker behind bars for a significant amount of time is not only an act of justice for the crimes that were committed, but it also protects the children whom the trafficker might target next were he or she not behind bars.
At the California Assembly’s hearing for the bill last Tuesday, one survivor of trafficking, Odessa Perkins, called out the Democrats’ reluctance to inflict harsher penalties for child trafficking as continuing the “horrific cycle of abuse and depravity.” As a black survivor of trafficking in California, her testimony contradicted opponents of the bill who claimed the proposal would lead to lead to overcrowded jails or contribute to mass incarceration of black individuals, saying, “I was molested and raped repeatedly by black and white men and even some women. So, it does not matter the race. What matters is saving our children. Traffickers are getting out of jail, parole, and reoffending …” Progressives who are soft on crime may try to use their tired and routine talking points, but this is simply not a racial issue, an economic issue, or even a partisan issue — it’s about protecting vulnerable children.
The bill’s sponsor, Republican State Senator Shannon Grove, expressed her shock and frustration that SB-14 was blocked, saying, “I am profoundly disappointed that committee Democrats couldn’t bring themselves to support the bill, with their stubborn and misguided objection to any penalty increase regardless of how heinous the crime.” Even Governor Gavin Newsom (D) was unhappy with the committee Democrats. The day after the committee vote, he called Grove to see how the bill might be revived. After the call, Newsom told reporters, “I want to understand exactly what happened yesterday. I take it very seriously.” He further noted that he “cares deeply” about the issue of child trafficking.
The public outcry and chastisement from California’s liberal governor was enough for most of the Democrats on the committee to reverse course entirely. On Thursday — just two days after the initial vote — the committee voted on SB-14 again. This time, it passed with six votes in favor while two Democrats still abstained from voting.
This is a small victory for justice and for the survivors of human trafficking. Next, the bill must be approved by the Assembly Appropriations Committee, which will likely vote on the bill mid-to-late August, before going on to the full Assembly. Grove believes that “most Assembly Democrats want to vote for this bill if they are given a chance” and is hopeful that the bill will be successful.
The controversy in California comes at a time when child human trafficking is garnering heightened attention after the theater release of the movie “Sound of Freedom,” based on a true story of a sting operation in Latin American that successfully led to the rescue of dozens of children trapped in sex slavery. Negative reactions to the movie from some legacy media outlets have been outrageous. The Guardian published the following heading: “Sound of Freedom: the QAnon-adjacent thriller seducing America.” Rolling Stone followed suit with the headline “‘Sound of Freedom’: Box Office Triumph for QAnon Believers.” The Washington Post attempted a faux nuanced tone with “QAnon and ‘Sound of Freedom’ Both Rely on Tired Hollywood Tropes.”
Many in the legacy media are trying to discredit “Sound of Freedom” — and its underlying message that the trafficking of children is a serious problem that ought to be addressed — by linking it to the QAnon conspiracy theory. But it begs the question: why? Do these progressive elites not think that human trafficking of children happens? Or is the reason even more sinister? The exact motivation is unclear; but what should be clear to Christians is that there is an intense spiritual battle surrounding this issue right now. We must pray that the darkness will be exposed, and that American’s hearts will be moved to bring the perpetrators of trafficking to justice and the victims of trafficking to freedom.
Human trafficking should be exactly the type of issue that unites everyone with an intact conscience. Human trafficking, especially of defenseless children, is a horrifying reality — one that everyone should want to see effectively combatted, and ultimately ended. The debacle over SB-14 last week was unexpected and disappointing, even for California. It might have taken a national uproar for Democrats to rethink their position on SB-14, but at least some did rethink it and change course.
We can hope that California Assembly members will now work diligently to see SB-14 pass the full Assembly. Beyond that, politicians across the United States should strategize on how our laws can more effectively address this scourge upon society.
The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2023-07-19 09:00:142023-07-19 09:05:04California Democrats Vote against Anti-Child Trafficking Bill, Then Change Course
Released in theaters last week, “Sound of Freedom” tells the true story of Tim Ballard, a Homeland Security agent who quits his job and joins forces with local Latin American law enforcement and underground contacts to rescue children caught in human trafficking. The film portrays Ballard as he sets up a sting operation that successfully frees a young Honduran boy and reunites him with his father. When the boy tells him about his sister who is still in captivity, Ballard becomes determined to find her. The heartfelt thriller has proven surprisingly successful, beating “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny” at the box office on July 4.
Despite the heavy subject matter, “Sound of Freedom” leaves viewers feeling hopeful and motivated to make a difference. In the film, Ballard’s character expresses understandable frustration that more is not being done to free enslaved children, saying, “And every day, ordinary people don’t want to hear it. It’s too ugly for polite conversation.” The film’s early success will hopefully prove that thinking false.
Human trafficking — both sex trafficking and labor trafficking, including of children — remains a widespread global problem, and America is not left untouched. Here is what you should know about human trafficking.
1. Human Trafficking Is More Prevalent Than You Think
The U.S. Department of Justice defines human trafficking as “a crime that involves compelling or coercing a person to provide labor or services, or to engage in commercial sex acts.” This coercion can be presented as “subtle or overt, physical or psychological.” The breadth of the issue creates a complex web of victims with different experiences, the majority of which never receive justice for the evil committed against them.
It is estimated that nearly 28 million individuals are trafficked globally at any given time. Human trafficking creates a global profit of $150 billion each year, making it “the most lucrative crime after drug trafficking.” Even so, only a fraction of traffickers are punished for their crimes. In 2022, there were 15,159 prosecutions worldwide for trafficking, yet these culminated in only 5,577 convictions. In the United States specifically, the National Human Trafficking Hotline received over 10,000 reports regarding 16,554 victims throughout 2021.
While human trafficking is not limited just to sex crimes, statistics reveal that the U.S. is a top consumer of child sex in the world. In the U.S. alone, the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children received more than 17,200 reports of child sex trafficking in the United States in 2021. Geoff Rogers, co-founder of the United States Against Human Trafficking, reports how the “United States is the No. 1 consumer of sex worldwide,” and demand is often being driven with children. Rogers asserts there are “a multitude of kids that are being sold as sex slaves today in America,” over half of which come from the foster care system. These statistics confirm the somber reality of this evil; child sex trafficking not only exists in foreign nations, but it thrives here in our communities.
2. Porn Creates Demand for Sex trafficking, Including for Child Sex Trafficking
Studies have shown the consumption of pornography contributes to the objectification of human beings and an “acceptance of sexual mistreatment.” In a lecture on the link between pornography and sex trafficking conducted by the Family Research Council, Arina Grossu emphasized the addictive nature of pornography, which fuels the demand for more pornographic material and sex acts. Many of these commodities are provided by individuals who are sex trafficked.
Specifically, research shows that those who observe pornography most often were also the ones to purchase women in prostitution for sex acts. Journalist John-Henry Westen asserts that viewership creates increased acceptance for violent, disturbing pornography, ultimately culminating in a clientele for the sex trafficking industry. With desensitization — and even broad acceptance — of porn consumption and engaging in pornographic activity, sex trafficking victims are used to meet the demand and produce content without the opportunity to express true consent. With the worldwide pornography industry worth $97 billion — its success largely attributed to its addictive nature — traffickers have an incentive to continue using victims for continued economic profit.
Even more startling is the growing success of online child pornography consumption. Of those who view child pornography, between 40-80% have in fact molested a minor themselves. Further research concludes 66-90% of women used to create pornographic material were victims of sexual abuse at some point during their childhood. This connection between childhood abuse and increased likelihood of being sex trafficked for pornographic material in the future draws attention to the crisis our society faces in protecting children from this evil.
3. Current U.S. Border Policy Is Enabling Human Traffickers
It is estimated upwards of 72% of all human trafficking victims in the U.S. are immigrants, many of which are transported across the border between the U.S. and Mexico. With the current status of the border, many girls, some as young as 14, are abducted prior to their arrival at the border then smuggled across to perform sex acts at a price. Approximately 60% of children who enter the U.S. illegally and unaccompanied are caught by cartel members and used in the production of child pornography.
In terms of the legislative process, the issues of illegal immigration and human trafficking are generally dealt with separately to pass bipartisan legislation more easily. The recently passed version of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act grants unaccompanied minors “special accommodations, such as expedited processing and benefits.” Unfortunately, these opportunities provided to unaccompanied minors incentivize minors to cross the border, ultimately creating minimal restrictions and increased opportunities for cartels to seize these children. To effectively address human trafficking in the U.S., we must also take measures to address rampant illegal border crossings, especially when unaccompanied minors are involved.
4. God Cares Deeply about Those Trapped in Slavery
In “Sound of Freedom,” Tim Ballard’s character successfully catches a pedophile attempting to traffic a child in a sting operation. The film’s representation of these real-world scenarios rightfully creates a stomach-churning reaction. Witnessing the cruelty of humanity in this way draws us to John 3:19: “And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil.” It’s a verse that naturally comes to mind when confronted with the evil of child exploitation. In this industry that so overtly disregards the value of human life — especially that of a child — let us remember that they reside in the darkness. For our fight is not against earthly foes, but it is “against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places” (Ephesians 6:12). That is why we should make every effort to administer justice to those in need and to deliver them from the wickedness of this fallen world (Psalm 82:3-4).
Human trafficking of those of any age is an assault on the human dignity of women and men and girls and boys made in the image of God (Genesis 1:27). We are right to be grieved by news of human trafficking and to seek justice for those who are oppressed (Isaiah 1:17).
5. You Can Be a Part of the Solution
If you feel a burden to make a difference on behalf of victims of human trafficking, a first step you can take is learning more about what the current challenges are. Then pray about what God might be calling you to do in your daily life. That may be donating to an organization that fights human trafficking, researching your states’ anti-trafficking laws and encouraging local leaders to make them stronger if needed, or praying with your small group from church.
For more on what you can do to fight trafficking, visit the National Center on Sexual Exploitation’s resources page. It includes action steps like how you can report suspected trafficking, how to upload images of your hotel room to a national database, and more.
Elected representatives at the state or federal level will often not prioritize an issue unless they think that their constituents are prioritizing it. Sharing information about human trafficking on social media, encouraging friends to see the “Sound of Freedom” movie, and telling your representatives you want to see more action done on fight human trafficking can all go a long way towards calling attention to human trafficking.
A quote often attributed to Mother Teresa reminds us, “I can do things you cannot, you can do things I cannot; together we can do great things.” We all can play a part in building momentum to address this evil.
Arielle Del Turco is Director of the Center for Religious Liberty at Family Research Council, and co-author of “Heroic Faith: Hope Amid Global Persecution.”
The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2023-07-13 05:56:372023-07-13 06:00:215 Things You Should Know about Human Trafficking
Exactly 46 years ago today — to the day — the U.S. Supreme Court authorized the mass extinction of tens of millions of pre-born children — cloaking the genocide in a made up out of thin air, alleged right to privacy.
That right to privacy then went on to hatch even more destruction — against the family, natural law and so forth. One of the big issues it gave birth to was, again, a never before heard of right to sodomite marriage.
Well, those two issues linked arms and joined forces a few days ago in a “Catholic” setting as two homosexual men stood in front of a parish just before Sunday Mass with their little boy Cohen and presented a syrupy presentation about just how normal they are and how completely ordinary their situation is.
More to the point: They waxed on about how the parish was so welcoming and accepting and how wonderful all the people in it were. They were inspired to start going there regularly because on an earlier trip, they had seen a lesbian couple bringing up the gifts and being warmly accepted.
At the end of their seven-minute presentation — rife with heresy — they received a standing ovation from the warm, friendly, accepting parishioners who just ate it all up.
The normalization of not just homosexuality anymore in Catholic parishes, but now on top of it, the accompanying child abuse that occurs when a child is “born” of a sodomite pairing — yes, we said, “Born.” Because this child was not adopted. The little boy, Cohen, is a product of in vitro fertilization (IVF) and a woman whose womb the homosexuals rented because natural law prevents them from having sex, conceiving, bearing and giving birth.
So they used every technological ability at their disposal to simply skirt all Church teaching further and bring a new life into the world, willfully depriving that boy of his God-given right to a mommy.
And the pastor allowed this. And the crowd went wild. And the bishop, well, he did issue a statement expressing his displeasure and said he would be meeting to “discuss the situation” after he gets back from the March for Life events in D.C.
The diocese is the archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, the parish is St. Joan of Arc and the bishop is Archbishop Bernard Hebda.
The two clerical clowns who run the parish are the pastor, Fr. Jim DeBruycker, and the parochial vicar, Fr. James Cassidy — you wouldn’t even know they are priests.
These men allow this evil to take place — in fact, they encourage it. Every Sunday, whatever wild-eyed modernist who wants to ramble on about gay this or that, immigration, trans this or that, climate change is invited to get up and speak for a few minutes on just how Catholic their immorality is — how central to their faith.
For example, the gay lovers told the fawning audience — and at this point, that’s all this parish is: an audience — that it was good for Cohen to have to fathers.
They also simply passed right over the horror of IVF — again speaking of it in purely ordinary terms. And this is where the gay, anti-life crowd finds its footing.
Surely, these two sodomites posing as actual Catholics must know that the IVF method automatically results in the death of many other children as part of the process.
Various eggs (where did two men get female eggs?) are all fertilized, allowed to grow for a period and then the ones determined to be best suited to come to full term are then implanted — in this case in a rented womb.
The others — meaning the other humans — they are “discarded,” a short little euphemism for killed. If, as is pretty routine, more than one tiny human was implanted in the rent-a-womb surrogate, at some point, “selection” is made again and the “leftovers” are killed in utero.
This is malevolent. Are the two homo “dads” going to tell little Cohen that in order for him to come into existence, they had to kill off some brothers and sisters of him, because since all they can do is sodomize each other, they had to resort to science?
Are they going to tell him that they actively chose to deny him a mommy because, in the end, all they cared about was trying to make their sodomy look normal?
But perhaps most pressing: Is Archbishop Hebda going to move to laicize the clergy that promote this horror, and is he going to disband that parish — which doesn’t even call itself a parish — it’s a “community.”
Hebda did not necessarily cause this issue, at least not at this parish, but he is certainly responsible now for stopping it dead in its tracks.
If that parish is still around, if those priests are still around at the end of the month, that will tell you everything you need to know about Archbishop Hebda.
EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant video with images is republished with permission.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/gay-is-anti-life-e1548239203123.png360640Church Militanthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngChurch Militant2019-01-23 05:27:482019-01-23 05:27:48GAY IS ANTI-LIFE: They’ll even kill to commit sodomy.
On Monday, March 20, 2017, Graham Spanier, past president of Penn State University, is scheduled to go to trial on charges of criminal child endangerment and conspiracy related to former football coach Jerry Sandusky’s rapes of little boys. At issue is whether Spanier, who was president of Penn State at the time, failed to investigate or covered up Sandusky’s crimes.
Unfortunately, there has been of late a spate of highly educated authorities, from the Pentagon to other government workers, teachers, doctors, etc., who have been arrested and even convicted for child sexual abuse, including possession of child pornography. Dr. Lori Handrahan’s publication of “Professors & Staff Arrested for Trading in Child Rape,” has sparked public outrage as the report has been shared more than 390,000 times in a few weeks. People are asking, how is this happening?
Spanier is academia sexual liberalism writ large
In fact, Spanier’s story exemplifies the consequences of sexual liberalism in academia. During his 16 years at Penn State, Spanier oversaw a number of questionable sexually charged activities. For example, Spanier apparently had no problem with Patrick Califia-Rice, a transgender sadomasochism and pedophilia advocate who keynoted a speech at Penn State in 2002. The president likewise supported an on-campus Sex Faire sporting fun for all such as “orgasm bingo” and “the tent of consent.” When asked if the fair was morally wrong, Spanier said, “It depends on what your definition of immoral is.” Given his moral confusion, would reports of Sandusky’s child rapes have elicited concern?
That was one of the questions I was asked to answer in 2014, when an investigator for Pennsylvania’s attorney general asked me to study Spainer’s scientific writings to determine whether there was a factual trail pointing to his not taking child sexual abuse allegations seriously.
My investigation first confirmed that Dr. Spanier held himself out as a sexuality expert. His 1973 doctoral dissertation was titled “Sexual Socialization.” It focused on adult sex with small children. His most important foundational work – his Ph.D. thesis – opens the door to his pedagogical philosophy, which is currently shared by a multitude of similarly educated and credentialed men and women.
From page 3 of Spanier’s dissertation:
To study this relationship, data collected by the Institute for Sex Research will be used. … To the best of my knowledge, this is the first study that attempts to investigate empirically how the sexual socializing experiences of childhood and adolescence influence the nature and extent of subsequent sexual behavior during high school and college.
… before age 12 or 13, the [sex assaults] experiences in question would not be interpreted as sexual. … [S]exual assault before ages 12 or 13 was not related to sexual behavior …. whereas sexual assault after ages 12 or 13 was. … [A] child’s sex education, sex knowledge, sexual values, and sexual behavior from adolescence onward will not be influenced by childhood [sex abuse] experiences since as a child he or she is not capable of interpreting sexual information and experiences in the same way an adult would. (:373)
It is likely that Spanier would not “label” Sandusky’s rapes as deviant, but rather as simple sex socialization of boys. That is illustrated further in a later article in which he found sex acts “deviant” only if we “labeled” them so. The observation below from his paper on one type of sexual deviance, “mate swapping,” could apply equally to child sex abuse.
We choose to view deviant behavior simply as behavior that some value and others consider wrong. An individual’s behavior becomes deviant only when others define it as deviant. Much of an individual’s behavior can be viewed as a response to this “labeling.” (:145)
According to that logic, Sandusky’s violent oral and anal sodomy of 10- and 11-year-old boys would not be viewed as “deviant” in and of itself.
Shortly after receiving his Ph.D., Spanier landed a Penn State professorship in 1977 and later served as vice provost at State University of New York at Stony Brook, provost at Oregon State University and chancellor at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln in 1991.
Spanier is representative of almost three generations of leaders who have embraced the mantra of Kinsey (a sadomasochistic, pornographic producing, pedophile professor), that “children are sexual from birth and unharmed by sex with adults.” Between justification by “science” and rampant pornographic stimuli, is it any wonder that so many of our leaders have succumbed to sadomasochistic pedophilia documented by Dr. Handrahan?
So again, the question is what/when did Dr. Spanier know of Sandusky’s child sex assaults? And, how many other high-level authorities were trained by a similar sexual worldview as the football coach and the president?
Ladies and gentlemen, an investigation of Kinsey and the Kinsey Institute waits in the wings. It almost happened under President Reagan in 1995 with H.R. 2749, “The Child Protection and Ethics in Education Act.” With President Trump, that window into child sex crimes as the basis of false and damaging research and education can be opened once again. Let those who believe that the truth must be revealed and all children protected gather together to join in the demand to revisit H.R. 2749!
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/penn-state-university-logo-e1489917981220.jpg360640Dr. Judith Reismanhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Judith Reisman2017-03-19 06:06:292017-03-19 06:07:21Penn State Scandal: When Child Sex Abuse is ‘Harmless’
Alfred Kinsey’s ongoing sexual anarchy campaign has no end in sight.
Matt Barber, associate dean of the Liberty University School of Law, and I attended the “B4U-ACT” pedophile conference Aug. 17. To eliminate the “stigma” against pedophiles, this growing sexual anarchist lobby wants the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to redefine pedophilia as a normal sexual orientation of “Minor-Attracted Persons.”
Adhering to the Kinsey principle of lulling “straights” into a false sense of security, pedophile dress was largely conservative – short hair, jackets, some ties and few noticeable male ear piercings.
Matt Barber and I sat in the back of the meeting room among roughly 50 activists and their “mental health” attending female enablers. “Pedophilia, Minor-Attracted Persons, and the DSM: Issues and Controversies,” keynoted “Fred Berlin, M.D., Ph.D., as founder, National Institute for the Study, Prevention and Treatment of Sexual Trauma; Johns Hopkins Sexual Disorders Clinic.”
However, the sex clinic was initially founded by John Money, Ph.D., to give judges “leeway” to keep child molesters out of jail. Money (deceased), a pedophile advocate, also called for an end to all age-of-consent laws. Dr. Berlin was his disciple.
In 1973, our “post Kinsey era,” a small APA committee of psychiatrists, quite terrified by homosexist public harassment, agreed to rely on Kinsey’s fraudulent human sexuality “data” to redefine homosexuality as normal, removing it from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) of mental disorders.
The APA decision was hyped in college textbooks, law journal articles, judicial rulings, and by 1974 pitched as high-school sex education. Soon the homosexist lobby would sail into primary schools and kindergartens by agitating recurring AIDS “prevention,” “bullying” and “hate” panics.
To redefine homosexuality as a normal “orientation,” nature not nurture, researchers were told to ignore all data of early sex abuse or other trauma. This hoax was followed by the 1999 U.S. Department of Justice data that found 64 percent of forcible sodomy victims to be boys under age 12.
For after claiming 10 percent to 37 percent of men were sometime homosexual, Kinsey also said children are sexual from birth and so deserve to have sex with adults or youths (taught as a 1974 Planned Parenthood sex ed doctrine).
The APA path to pedophile norms follows the success of the homosexual anarchy campaign. Arguably, the pedophile media lobby directed the passionate boy-boy kisses on the TV series “Glee,” to enable fellow “Minor-Attracted Persons” to increasingly be seen as a boy’s sex “friend.”
B4U-ACT claims to “help mental health professionals learn more about attraction to minors and to consider the effects of stereotyping, stigma, and fear.” While the group claimed they want to teach pedophiles “how to live life fully and stay within the law,” no one suggested how to stop their child lust or molestation.
Barber asked what “age of consent” the group proposed and what role pornography plays as a causative factor in child sex abuse. No one would answer the first question, and all denied any harm from pornography.
Arguably, due to our presence, Dr. Berlin (who sat next to me during the entire event) admitted that occasionally pornography could trigger sexual acting out. He also expressed a personal belief that pre-pubescent children (that is, under about age 10) cannot consent, and that perhaps even teenagers might be sexually vulnerable.
All speakers focused on pedophiles as healthy, normal and unfairly victimized by stigma and mean words. Following repeated assertions that pedophiles never force children, are gentle and loving, one researcher did cite a child “victim” who was raped and sodomized.
One speaker laughingly compared doing an obscene act “on” a child to doing the same obscene act on a shoe. No one protested, and some chuckled. One young female suggested pedophiles might be helped by engaging in “sex play” using naked pictures of pseudo children, allied with some sadism, bridal gowns, etc. This Ph.D. social worker candidate proudly noted her objection to any “repression.”
For their attendance, the pedophile political activists could earn 6.0 units of continuing education credits by the “Maryland Board of Social Work Examiners.” These 12 board members credentialed this pedophile academic farce, giving higher education credits to allow felons and near-felons to advance their child sexual abuse agenda by using bogus and fraudulent research. I would encourage people to complain to the board at this link.
Committed to quietly monitoring this meeting, I offered a few unwelcome closing remarks. I noted the arrogance of this group’s conclusion that Americans’ fear for child safety is due to a puritanical “sex panic.” Since the Department of Justice found 58,200 children kidnapped by non-family members in 1999, such fear seems well-placed.
Before leaving the issue of stigma and hate speech, note a few excerpts from BOYCHAT April 15 by some of these “social worker” credentialed pedophiles:
“Judith Reisman” is “with the worst of them … dehumanizing hate speech … extreme christian [sic], right wing … alarmist … creating gross distrotions [sic] … no genuine integrity … a harlot. … Judith did, in fact, make [Kinsey’s sexual stimulation of infants and toddlers] sound like horrendously violent, child sexual assault … [she is a] horrible, wretched scumbag … pathetic, sorry excuse for a human being. … The world will become a less wretched place, the second Judith Reisman drops dead [from natural causes, of course, though I’d not complain if she got accidentally ran over by a semi]. … With Love, Stevie-D.”
