For Your Health Pt. 20 – FDA’s Warning about Acetaminophen

tylonalskinrash

FDA.Gov

Acetaminophen, a fever and pain reliever that is one of the most widely used medicines in the U.S., can cause rare but serious skin reactions, warns the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Although rare, possible reactions to acetaminophen include three serious skin diseases whose symptoms can include rash, blisters and, in the worst case, widespread damage to the surface of skin. If you are taking acetaminophen and develop a rash or other skin reaction, stop taking the product immediately and seek medical attention right away.

Ingredient Linked to Several Conditions

Stevens-Johnson Syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are the two most serious skin reactions linked in rare cases to acetaminophen. They usually require hospitalization and can cause death.

Problems usually begin with flu-like symptoms followed by rash, blistering and extensive damage to the surfaces of the skin. Recovery can take weeks or months, and possible complications include scarring, changes in skin pigmentation, blindness and damage to internal organs.

A third skin reaction, acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP), usually resolves within two weeks of stopping the medication that caused the problem.

A serious skin reaction can occur at any time, even if you’ve taken acetaminophen previously without a problem. There is currently no way of predicting who might be at higher risk.

If you’ve ever had a skin reaction when taking acetaminophen, don’t take the drug again and discuss alternate pain relievers/fever reducers with your health care professional.

Continue Reading…

Related stories are listed below:

  1. Kaitlyn Langstaff
  2. FDA: Acetaminophen linked to rare, serious skin reactions, fatalities
  3. Tylenol and FDA

The Secrets of Scientology

secretsofscientology

BBC.Co.Uk

Reporter John Sweeney’s last investigation into the Church of Scientology resulted in an explosive confrontation with church officials. This time, in a Panorama Special, one of those officials has turned whistle-blower to help him reveal the dark secrets of the church, which boasts Hollywood A-listers Tom Cruise and John Travolta among its devotees.

Matthew 6

22    The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.
23    But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!

Related articles listed below:

  1. Church Of Scientology former Member Speaks Out about Cult
  2. Catholicism Crisis of Faith

Changing Laws Pt. 15 – Obama’s Gun Measure Defeat

obamasgunmeasuredefeat

In President Obama’s “Today Is A Shameful Day for Washington” speech, the Senate was criticized for not approving of the new bill for gun control, and were blamed for being intimidated by a minority of voters who would no longer support the various senators if they approve of the new gun measures. But is this really the case? President Obama claims that the bill would not violate any constitutional rights. But can this claim be taken serious? Could the Senate, and their alleged fear of a minority of voters, actually be the reason for the lack of cooperation with Obama’s gun control agenda? Or is it more likely that the president’s stretching of the laws, and his changing of the laws, to work in favor of radical liberal agendas has cost him credibility with many Americans, who now are convinced that the president has little to no concern for the constitution, and, therefore, cannot be trusted, nor cooperated with, in cases of gun laws, and constitutional rights?

There have, in fact, been times when the president has violated American’s trust, and has shown himself to be a radical liberal, who is willing to work in secret against the people of the U.S. and engage in subtle doubletalk, in his speeches, to fool unsuspecting people into thinking that he is only trying to do what’s best for the country. Examples of these would be his administrations’ labeling of Christians as possible domestic terrorists, the many promises which he both made and broke in his first term, his willingness to work with the U.N. on gun safety, his efforts to have the unjust law of the NDAA passed, which allows for American citizens to be detained for an indefinable  amount of time without first committing a crime, his radical support of, the Islamic Brotherhood controlled, Egypt, his weak stance on real terrorism, his radical liberal, socialist, healthcare bill, and the Give Act, just to name few.

Therefore, the Senates lack of willingness to submit to “common sense” in regards to Obama’s gun measures cannot be perceived by these same American’s, who no longer have any confidence in Obama as a fellow American, but instead, is now viewed by them as a communist, or communitarian, as negligence, and fear of a minority of voters. Instead, to these Americans, who are not liberals, the Senate’s lack of cooperation should  be viewed as true common sense, and gratefully welcomed.

In short, only true Americans, who do not violate traditional constitutional values, can be cooperated with, and trusted, by the country on gun control laws, and not radical liberals, who use Saul Alinsky tactics to manipulate ignorant people into radically changing the country for the worst.

Related articles are listed below:

  1. Radical Takeover Pt. 4 – Rome’s Extreme Liberal Stance on Gun Control
  2. Crackdown on Liberty Pt. 12 – Gun Control
  3. Crackdown on Liberty Pt. 15 – U.N.’s Approval of Global Arms Trade Treaty

Radical Takeover Pt. 11 – Gay Rights Agenda to Destroy Marriage

Supreme Court Hears Prop. 8 Case

The claims in the articles below suggest a hidden agenda for the institution of marriage. It is an agenda to change, and ultimately destroy, marriage. The articles reveal a forgotten side of the gay rights movement that the mainstream media is not reporting, yet is still an issue today. This issue is a deep rooted determination, among gay activists, to be liberated from traditional relationships, and from the traditional institution of the family.

IllinoisFamily.Org

Homosexual Activist Admits True Purpose of Battle is to Destroy Marriage

Even knowing that there are radicals in all movements, doesn’t  lessen the startling admission recently by lesbian journalist Masha Gessen.  On a radio [RN Podcast] show she actually admits that homosexual activists are lying about their radical political agenda.  She says that they don’t want to access the institution of marriage; they want to radically redefine and eventually eliminate it.

Here is what she recently said on a radio interview:

“It’s a no-brainer that (homosexual activists) should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. …(F)ighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we get there — gayrightsendmarriage5because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie.

The institution of marriage is going to change, and it should change. And again, I don’t think it should exist. And I don’t like taking part in creating fictions about my life. That’s sort of not what I had in mind when I came out thirty years ago.

I have three kids who have five parents, more or less, and I don’t see why they shouldn’t have five parents legally… I met my new partner, and she had just had a baby, and that baby’s biological father is my brother, and my daughter’s biological father is a man who lives in Russia, and my adopted son also considers him his father. So the five parents break down into two groups of three… And really, I would like to live in a legal system that is capable of reflecting that reality, and I don’t think that’s compatible with the institution of marriage.”

Continue Reading…

LifeSiteNews.Com

Most homosexuals don’t want to ‘marry’ or adopt, French homosexual leader admits

The co-founder of a new French homosexual organization, Homovox, says that most homosexuals do not want to marry or adopt children, and are not supporters of the socialist government’s proposed legislation to create homosexual “marriage.”

French lesbian Nathalie de Williencourt says she decided to create the group as a result of her frustration over a vocal homosexual lobby that has been unquestioningly accepted as the mouthpiece of all of the country’s homosexuals.gayrightsendmarriage1

The homosexuals Williencourt knows “don’t have any desire to marry nor to adopt.”

“They don’t feel represented by activists that they haven’t chosen, who steal the stage from a silent majority,” she told the French magazine Christian Family. “Many feel belittled, mistreated by this array of demands that stigmatize them.”

Homovox, which was established in November of last year, has created a website displaying testimony by numerous homosexuals who disavow the push for homosexual “marriage.” Willeincourt says that the organization marched on Sunday with up to one million other French citizens protesting the proposed legislation.

Continue Reading…

Telegraph.Co.Uk

The gay radicals of the past didn’t want equality: they wanted liberation, and thought marriage was oppression

Some overexcited observers are describing last night’s passing of the gay marriage bill as the glorious endpoint to nearly 50 years of agitation for gay rights. Finally, and courtesy largely of David Cameron, New York City’s Stonewall rioters of 1969 and the daring organisers of Britain’s first-ever Gay Pride parades in the early 1970s have seen their dreams of equality come true. They had a dream, those early warriors for homosexual rights, and now that dream is a reality. Let us rejoice!

There is only one problem with this narrative – it is the biggest load of bunkum. It glosses over the fact that those early gay radicals were not gayrightsendmarriage3remotely interested in getting married, or in winning equality, the only thing that today’s super-square gay campaigners and their cheerleaders go on about. The Stonewall radicals wanted liberation, not equality, and they wanted to destroy marriage, not buy into it. The Gay Liberation Front that emerged out of the Stonewall riot insisted that “complete sexual liberation for all people cannot come about unless existing social institutions are abolished”.

It was pretty clear that one of the social institutions that would have to be done away with was marriage. A Gay Manifesto, an influential radical pamphlet published in 1970, described marriage as “a rotten, oppressive institution”. In Gay is Good, lesbian activist Martha Shelley’s explosive and much-loved 1972 booklet, homosexuals were described as “women and men who, from the time of our earliest memories, have been in revolt against the sex-role structure and the nuclear family structure”. As for Britain’s early Gay Pride get-togethers – they viewed marriage and the family as “a patriarchal prison that enslaves women, gays and children”. To depict last night’s passing of the gay marriage bill as a victory for these early campaigners is a bit like saying the nuking of Hiroshima was the joyous outcome of CND marches.

Writing in 2002, on the 30th anniversary of Britain’s first Gay Pride parade, Peter Tatchell said: “There were no calls for equality; our demand was liberation. We wanted to change society, not conform to it.” So in essence, the gay marriage campaign of today, with its drab demand that gayrightsendmarriage4homosexuals be granted equal access to the social institution of “rotten, oppressive” marriage, represents not the fulfilment of early gay radicals’ demands but the warping of them, the stomping of them into the dirt of history. It is a well-known fact that most radicals end up going straight, eventually donning a suit and tie and accepting a fat wage packet in return for tempering their ideals. But the gay movement, in switching from loathing marriage to longing to enter into it, and from demanding that the state get our of their lives to pleading with the state to officiate their relationships, has performed an about-face that is unprecedented even in modern radical politics.

Continue Reading…

Related Articles are listed below:

  1. War on Consciousness Pt. 21 – The Jesuits & The Gay Rights Movement
  2. Changing Laws Pt. 10 – France Set to Ban the Words ‘Mother’ and ‘Father’ from Official Documents
  3. War on Consciousness Pt. 20 – The U.N.’s Sexual Perversion of Children through World Sex Education Curriculum

War on Consciousness Pt. 31 – Gosnell Trial Media Cover-Up

gonsell

LifeNews.Com

The cat is finally out of the bag. A blogger for the liberal Huffington Post has finally admitted that liberal mainstream media outlets made a conscious decision to ignore the Kermit Gosnell abortion-murder trial.

In a HuffPost Live segment today on the issue, host Marc Lamont Hill admitted what many pro-life advocates have been thinking:

“For what it’s worth, I do think that those of us on the left have made a decision not to cover this trial because we worry that it’ll compromise abortion rights. Whether you agree with abortion or not, I do think there’s a direct connection between the media’s failure to cover this and our own political commitments on the left. I think it’s a bad idea, I think it’s dangerous, but I think that’s the way it is.”

Other liberal media outlets and pro-abortion bloggers have also begun admitting there was a blackout on covering Gosnell.

For information, click on the link entitled “Is the Media Ignoring the Gosnell Story“?

Related articles are listed below:

  1. 3801 Lancaster Abortions
  2. Black Genocide in 21st Century America
  3. Eugenics and its Strange Advocates

Worldview Weekend Radio Commentary on Common Core Curriculum

commoncore

WorldviewWeekend.Com

Topic: Brannon explains why he is thankful for the “Baby Boom” generation of Christians and what will it mean for the church if the Lord does not return before this generation goes on to glory? Topic: Home-school publishers and private Christian schools are conforming to federal education standards tied to United Nations. What many of us that were writing and predicting in regards to Goals 2000 and America 2000 some twenty years ago is now coming to pass. Topic: A U.S. Army Reserve Equal Opportunity training report describes “evangelical Christianity” as examples of religious extremism. While Christians that stand for Biblical truth will be persecuted according to 2 Timothy 3:12; is it possible that the rhetoric of some of the New Religious Right plays right into the hands of the government? Topic: Hear the audio of what is reported by Right-wing Watch to be a talk show host for the American Family Association and Radio Network. In this audio this host makes a statement that Brannon believes could give the government cause to label Christians as “extremists when such statements are made. Brannon also believes the statement by this talk show host is a very poor witness to the unsaved world and a bad example to other Christians. Brannon describes that such a statement might reveal a real problem with how many self-professing Christians think. Brannon explains why such a statement is completely unacceptable and should be rejected and seen for what it is.

To listen to the program, click on the link entitled, “Commentary on Common Core Curriculum“.

Related articles are listed below:

  1. War on Consciousness Pt. 30 – The Mainstream Media’s ‘Group Think’ Conditioning
  2. Radical Takeover Pt. 1 – CULTURAL MARXISM: The Corruption of America
  3. War on Consciousness Pt. 17 – IB’s “World Peace” Indoctrination

3801 Lancaster Abortions

3801_lancaster

3801Lancaster.Com

Pennsylvania Abortion Doctor Charged with 8 Counts of Murder (Huffington Post)

A doctor whose abortion clinic was described as a filthy, foul-smelling “house of horrors” that was overlooked by regulators for years was charged Wednesday with murder, accused of delivering seven babies alive and then using scissors to kill them.

Victims Say Abortion Doctor Scarred Them for Life (Phila. Inquirer)

Fifteen-year-old Robyn Reid didn’t want an abortion. But when her grandmother forcibly took her to an abortion clinic one wintry day in 1998, Reid figured she’d just tell the doctor her wishes and then sneak away.

Two Philly Abortion Mill Workers Plead Guilty (CBS)

Two abortion clinic workers pleaded guilty Thursday to third-degree murder in deaths at a Philadelphia clinic where seven babies were allegedly killed with scissors and a patient died from an overdose of painkillers.

Grand Jury Faults State Regulators for Not Stopping Abortion Doctor Charged with Murders (Phila. Inquirer)

Among the many questions raised by the grisly charges against West Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell, one stands out: how did this go on so long?

Doctor’s Long Tumble to Jail (Phila. Inquirer)

It was another bad day at the abortion clinic in West Philadelphia. A patient – an Asian refugee, 41, traveling from Virginia – had died from heavy doses of painkillers and anesthesia.

Suspension of 2 Doctors Sought by State (Washington Times)

The Delaware attorney general’s office is seeking to suspend the licenses of two doctors who worked in Wilmington with a Philadelphia abortion doctor charged with killing infants.

Pa. Governor Fires Workers After Abortion Scandal (CBS)

Some state employees have been fired and two agencies have overhauled their regulations in the wake of allegations that a doctor performed illegal abortions that killed a patient and viable infants, Gov. Tom Corbett announced Tuesday.

2 Abortion Clinics Closed After Reports (Washington Times)

Pennsylvania health officials say renewed inspections uncovered poor conditions at two more Philadelphia-area abortion clinics in the months after a drug investigation revealed a “house of horrors” facility operating in the city.

2nd Delaware Doctor Suspended Over PA Abortion Case (ABC 6, Philadelphia)

Delaware officials have suspended the medical license of a second Delaware doctor linked to a Philadelphia abortion provider charged with murdering a patient.

Unlicensed Doctor Pleads in Philly Abortion Case (ABC 6, Philadelphia)

An unlicensed doctor pleaded guilty on Thursday to third-degree murder in the deaths of two late-term babies who were born alive and then killed with scissors at a filthy Philadelphia abortion clinic.

2 Plead Guilty to Murder in Abortion Case (Washington Times)

A pair of abortion clinic workers pleaded guilty Thursday to third-degree murder in two deaths at a Philadelphia clinic where seven babies allegedly were killed with scissors and a woman died from a drug overdose.

3801Lancaster.Com

A documentary film about Kermit Gosnell, the Philadelphia Women’s Medical Society disaster, and the cover-up by state and local oversight agencies.

Related stories are listed below:

  1. Eugenics and its Strange Advocates
  2. Black Genocide in 21st Century America
  3. Eugenics According to Darwin

Changing Laws Pt. 14 – Cyprus Deal: A New Template for the E.U.

CyprusDeal

RT.Com

A senior lawmaker told Reuters the Cyprus model may not be an isolated case, and is perhaps a future template in dealing with troubled European banks.

The new template is now likely to turn into a full-scale EU law, letting taxpayers off the hook in case a bail-out is needed, but imposing major losses on bigger savers on a permanent basis.

“You need to be able to do the bail-in as well with deposits,” said Gunnar Hokmark, member of European Parliament, who is leading negotiations with EU countries to finalize a law for winding up problem banks, Reuters reported.

“Deposits below 100,000 euros are protected … deposits above 100,000 euros are not protected and shall be treated as part of the capital that can be bailed in,” Hokmark told Reuters, adding that he was confident a majority of his peers in the parliament backed the idea.

The European Commission has written the draft of the law, which now awaits approval from eurozone member states and the parliament on whether and when it can be implemented. It’s been reported, the law is planned to take effect in the beginning of 2015.

“What we’ve done last night is what I call pushing back the risks,” Dijsselbloem told Reuters and the Financial Times hours after the Cyprus deal was struck Monday.

After speaking to reporters, news outlets prolieferated Disselbloem’s ‘Cyprus as a template’ commentary, which sent markets into a spook and tanked many trading indexes. Analysts took the rhetoric as a signal Cyprus was not a unique case, and other Euro economies, could be next.

Now Dijsselbloem is eating his words and defended himself saying he doesn’t even know the English word ‘template’, but he was simply describing the process itself.

“If there is a risk in a bank, our first question should be ‘Okay, what are you in the bank going to do about that? What can you do to recapitalise yourself?’ If the bank can’t do it, then we’ll talk to the shareholders and the bondholders, we’ll ask them to contribute in recapitalising the bank, and if necessary the uninsured deposit holders,” he said.

Though the word ‘template’ wasn’t explicitly used, his comments still indicate he doesn’t think Cyprus is a one-time deal.

The International Monetry Fund and German officials back the new template and see it as a more sustainable approach to battling the sovereign debt problems that spread like a virus in financially weak members of the eurozone.

Economist Yanis Varoufakis believes the situation in the rest of the eurozone is not looking good after the “basic principle” of a banking union and solidarity throughout the eurozone has been jeopardized.

“As long as even a small probability of losing their money is present and persistent, the capital flight from the periphery to the core of the eurozone is going to continue unabated and this is going to constantly undermine the integrity of the eurozone,” Varoufakis told RT. “Suppose you are a depositor in Spain… Even if there is a small probability in your mind that something similar could happen with your insolvent Spanish bank, and they are insolvent after all, why would you keep money in your Spanish bank account and not transfer it to Frankfurt, to Deutsche bank, let’s say? There is no reason why you shouldn’t transfer it to Germany.”

Related articles are listed below:

  1. Blair signs away Britain’s sovereignty
  2. Radical Takeover Pt. 6 – Rome’s Social Justice & Communism
  3. Radical Takeover Pt. 7 – Rome’s Support of Occupy Wall Street & World Bank
  4. Crackdown on Liberty Pt. 15 – U.N.’s Approval of Global Arms Trade Treaty

Crackdown on Liberty Pt. 15 – U.N.’s Approval of Global Arms Trade Treaty

global arms trade treaty

Reuters.Com

The 193-nation U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday overwhelmingly approved the first treaty on the global arms trade, which seeks to regulate the $70 billion business in conventional arms and keep weapons out of the hands of human rights abusers.

The National Rifle Association (NRA), a powerful U.S. pro-gun lobbying group that has opposed the treaty from the start, said it was a sad day for the United States, which joined the vast majority of U.N. member states by voting for the pact.

Iran, Syria and North Korea cast the sole votes against the treaty. The same three states last week prevented a treaty-drafting conference at U.N. headquarters from reaching the required consensus to adopt the pact.

The official U.N. tally showed 154 votes in favor, three against 23 abstentions, though diplomats and U.N. officials said the actual vote was 155-3-22. They said Angola was recorded as having abstained, though it had attempted to vote yes.

Iran, which is under a U.N. arms embargo over its nuclear program, is eager to ensure its arms imports and exports are not curtailed, while Syria’s government is embroiled in a two-year civil war and relies on arms from Russia and Iran, envoys said.

North Korea is also under a U.N. arms embargo due to its nuclear weapons and missile programs.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon welcomed the vote, saying the treaty “will help to keep warlords, pirates, terrorists, criminals and their like from acquiring deadly arms.”

The treaty will be open for signature on June 3 and will enter into force 90 days after the 50th signatory ratifies it. Mexican U.N. Ambassador Luis Alfonso de Alba told reporters it normally takes two to three years for a treaty to come into force, but said he hoped it would happen sooner in this case.

Major arms producers China and Russia joined Cuba, Bolivia, Nicaragua and other countries in abstaining. Although a significant number of countries abstained, putting the treaty to a General Assembly vote was the only way its supporters could get it adopted after the treaty conference collapsed last week.

NRA: ‘A SAD, YET TELLING, DAY’

Many of the countries that abstained, among them India, complained the treaty favored exporting over importing states. Russia said Moscow would take a hard look at the treaty before deciding whether to sign it.

Several delegates told Reuters the treaty’s effectiveness would be limited if major arms exporters refused to sign it.

The United States, the world’s No. 1 arms exporter, voted in favor of the treaty despite fierce opposition from the NRA, whose lobbying wing – the NRA Institute for Legislative Action – issued a statement condemning the U.N. vote.

“This treaty disregards the Second Amendment to our Constitution and threatens individual firearm ownership,” said Chris Cox, head of the NRA-ILA. “It is a sad, yet telling, day when the president of the United States and his administration refuse to defend America’s Constitution on the world stage.”

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said in a statement the U.N. adopted “a strong, effective and implementable Arms Trade Treaty that can strengthen global security while protecting the sovereign right of states to conduct legitimate arms trade.”

“Nothing in this treaty could ever infringe on the rights of American citizens under our domestic law or the Constitution, including the Second Amendment,” he added, referring to the U.S. Constitutional amendment that guarantees the right to bear arms.

The NRA has vowed to fight to prevent the treaty’s ratification by the U.S. Senate when it reaches Washington.

Syrian U.N. Ambassador Bashar Ja’afari repeated that his government opposes the arms trade treaty because it does not ban the sale of weapons to non-state actors and “terrorists” like those it says are active in Syria. The civil war there has claimed at least 70,000 lives, according to U.N. estimates.

Syria routinely refers to rebels trying to oust President Bashar al-Assad as “terrorists” backed by foreign governments.

The treaty does not ban transfers to armed groups, but says all arms transfers should be subjected to rigorous risk and human rights assessments first.

British Prime Minister David Cameron hailed the vote as a “landmark agreement that will save lives and ease the immense human suffering caused by armed conflict around the world.”

SCRUTINY ON HUMAN RIGHTS

Mexico issued a statement on behalf of 98 U.N. member states saying, “an effective implementation of this treaty will make a real difference for the people of the world.”

U.N. member states began meeting on March 18 in a final push to end years of discussions and hammer out a binding international treaty to end the lack of regulation over cross-border conventional arms sales.

Arms control activists and rights groups have said a treaty was needed to halt the uncontrolled flow of arms and ammunition that they say fuels wars, atrocities and rights abuses.

The Arms Trade Treaty aims to set standards for all cross-border transfers of conventional weapons. It would also create binding requirements for states to review all cross-border arms contracts to ensure that arms will not be used in human rights abuses, terrorism or violations of humanitarian law.

“The agreement of the Arms Trade Treaty sends a clear message to arms dealers who supply warlords and dictators that their time is up,” said Anna Macdonald of the global development group Oxfam.

The main reason the arms trade talks took place at all is that the United States, the world’s biggest arms trader, reversed U.S. policy on the issue after President Barack Obama was first elected and decided in 2009 to support a treaty.

Related articles are listed below:

  1. After Obama win, U.S. backs new U.N. arms treaty talks
  2. Crackdown on Liberty Pt. 12 – Gun Control
  3. Crackdown on Liberty Pt. 3 – Domestic Terrorists
  4. Radical Takeover Pt. 4 – Rome’s Extreme Liberal Stance on Gun Control

War on Consciousness Pt. 29 – Arts & Entertainment & The Homosexual Agenda

bradybunch

Noise of Thunder Radio Show

Chris discusses a recent article in which Susan Olsen, star of the 70’s show “The Brady Bunch,” pays homage to her TV dad — the late Robert Reed — celebrating the fact that he was a homosexual, and blaming his death on Christians who preach against the gay lifestyle.  Her testimony is the latest in Hollywood’s ongoing war against the Christian faith.  Olsen goes out of her way to say that those who oppose homosexuality are “exactly like the primitive practice of people who killed babies” who were born with birth defects.  But is it really “Christianity” that causes the premature death of homosexuals?  Robert Reed’s death reveals the truth about the gay philosophy, and exposes the true culprits in what is devastating the homosexual community.

To listen to the show, click on the link entitled, “THE BRADY BUNCH & THE HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA“.

HuffingtonPost.Com

Susan Olsen, ‘Brady Bunch’ Star, On Gay Marriage, TV Dad Robert Reed

Add Cindy Brady to the slew of stars who have sounded off on their support of marriage equality.

“Brady Bunch” actress Susan Olsen, who played the character Cindy Brady on the iconic series, posted a cover photo to her Facebook page that has the caption, “Please God, let the Supreme Court know that you think it’s OK for gay people to marry.”

As Queerty points out, her fan page has also quoted her saying that her “gay TV dad would have been the best husband ever.” Of Robert Reed, who played Mike Brady, she reportedly writes:

“As a child, I was BLESSED to have another father figure in my life. He did not replace my own beloved, Norwegian version of Jed Clampett, nor would he have wanted to. He simply harmonized with all of my family values and brought his own heart to our table. This wonderful man was a giant in my world, a true king among men. His name was, and is, Robert Reed (OK that’s his stage name). This tempetuous actor who bottle fed puppies when he wasn’t quarreling with the heads of networks, shaped my heart as much as my biological parents did. So I really can honestly say, ‘My Dad was Gay.'”

She went on to note:

“‘I can also say that being gay killed him. Because it was so taboo, he could never make peace with himself. He never allowed himself to have a genuine love. He was forever taunted by his own disdain for the natural inclinations that he was BORN WITH. Bob was a family man. Had he been allowed to form a relationship with another man, he would have been the best husband ever and might still be alive.

To me, the vilification of homosexuality is exactly like the primitive practice of people who killed babies who were born with cleff palates or birth marks. It is a worship not of God but of fear itself in the form of a God who hates.”

You can read the full post here and here.

Reed, who was by all accounts a closeted gay man, died in 1992 of colon cancer. He was also revealed to have been HIV positive at the time of his death.

“Arrow” star Stephen Amell recently posted a message to his Facebook page in support of same-sex marriage. Beyonce and Madonna also posted supportive handwritten messages to their Instagram accounts.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

 

Related articles are listed below:

  1. Evangelicals Face Growing Tension Between Political And Personal Views Of Gay Marriage
  2. Ted Haggard Says Gay Marriage Not Biblical, But Should Be Legal
  3. Tim Keller on Homosexuality and Biblical Authority: Different Crisis, Same Problem
  4. War on Consciousness Pt. 21 – The Jesuits & The Gay Rights Movement