The American Vision: A Biblical Worldview Ministry

America's Real Bullies (Update)

Become an insider.
Sign up for our emails.

We won't spam, rent, sell, or share
your information in any way.

Update: I just received a copy of the Spring 2010 (10.3) issue of The Social Contract. The Editor read about American Vision being included on the SPLC "hate" list and sent me a copy. It's a comprehensive expose of the SPLC. For more information, go to

New Jersey has passed an aggressive anti-bullying statute. The “Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights,” as it’s called, was in process before the suicide of Rutgers freshman Tyler Clementi who had been videoed while engaged in a homosexual encounter. Making the video public was not bullying since Rutgers University is pro-homosexual and where homosexuality is considered a sexual sacrament. America’s real bullies are those organizations and government entities that impose a pro-homosexual agenda on an unwilling public.

America’s real bullies are almost never criticized. Homosexual groups have been bullying companies, movie studios, schools, and Christian groups for decades. The latest act of bullying came from GLAAD when the pro-homosexual group demanded that Universal Pictures remove anti-“gay” language from the Ron Howard film, The Dilemma. I’m not the only one making the claim of homosexual bullying. A number of liberals have been critical of GLAAD (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation), arguing that it “has turned into one of the biggest bullies in Hollywood.” Consider this report:

In many ways, leftist Hollywood created this monster. As a general rule, you can never appease a bully, most especially an ideological bully like GLAAD. Their goal here is not a seat at the table, their goal is ideological purity, and once you give into them they smell your weakness and never stop coming at you.

School systems have been bullied by pro-homosexual groups and politicians to reshape the curricula of public schools. Judges have bullied voters by overturning elections that resulted in redefining marriage. This happened with the vote in 2008 on Proposition 8. The referendum provided that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” The proposition passed 52.4% to 47.76% in one of the most liberal states in the union. The results didn’t stop United States district court Judge Vaughn R. Walker from bullying millions of voters by an injunction against enforcing Proposition 8 on August 4, 2010 in the case Perry v. Schwarzenegger.

Then there’s the anti-Christian bullying by pro-homosexual activist Kathy Griffin. “Upon receiving an Emmy Award Statue in 2007, Griffin announced: ‘I guess hell froze over. A lot of people come up here and thank Jesus for this. He had nothing to do with this. ... Suck it, Jesus! This award is my god now.’”As far as I know, not a single Christian killed himself over her remarks or the remarks made by other entertainers, politicians, or authors who berate Christians and Christianity on a regular basis. Bullying Christians has been documented in rigorous detail in David Limbaugh’s Persecution: How Liberals are Waging War Against Christians, Janet Folger’s The Criminalization of Christianity: Read This Book Before It Becomes Illegal!, and Donald Wildmon’s  Speechless: Silencing the Christians.

Then there are groups like the ACLU that continually bully schools and local governments to stop referencing religion in any way. Graduating high school students are threatened with legal action if they mention God in a graduation address. If a government official prays in “Jesus’ name,” the ACLU will swoop in and threaten a lawsuit. This usually happens to small municipalities where any legal challenge will most likely drain money from the budget.

One of the biggest bullies around is the Southern Poverty Law Center. American Vision has once again made SPLC’s “Hate Groups List.” American Vision was proud to have made the list last year and doubly proud to make it this year. The list is a “who’s who” of mainstream evangelical ministries who have been brave enough to speak out against the homosexual agenda and those groups that support it. A number of groups on the list have protested being adding to the list. Not American Vision. If a multi-million-dollar funded group like the SPLC considers American Vision a threat to their anti-Christian agenda, then why would we want to object? I can understand why some of these other designates don’t want to be called a hate group. But we have to remember who’s doing the labeling. The SPLC loves what God hates. The Bible describes the group well:

“Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil;
Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness;
Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!” (Isa. 5:20).

One should keep in mind that the SPLC goes out of its way to put the worst spin on anti-homosexual groups. It objects to AV’s claim that America was founded on fundamental Christian principles, some of which were clearly anti-homosexual. In Bowers vs. Hardwick (1986) the Supreme Court concluded:

Sodomy was a criminal offense at common law and was forbidden by the laws of the original 13 States when they ratified the Bill of Rights. In 1868, when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified, all but 5 of the 37 States in the Union had criminal sodomy laws. In fact, until 1961, all 50 States outlawed sodomy, and today [1986], 25 States and the District of Columbia continue to provide criminal penalties for sodomy performed in private and between consenting adults. [1]

At a General Court Marshall, on March 10, 1778, a Lieutenant Enslin was “tried for attempting to commit sodomy with John Monhort.” He was also tried for “Perjury in swearing to false Accounts.” Enslin was “found guilty of the charges exhibited against him, being breaches of 5th. Article 18th. Section of the Articles of War.” He was dismissed from the service “with infamy. His Excellency the Commander in Chief [George Washington] approve[d] the sentence and with Abhorrence and Detestation of such infamous Crimes order[ed] Lieutt. Enslin to be drummed out of the Camp . . . by all the Drummers and Fifers in the Army never to return.” [2]

The SPLC claims that American Vision is against “democracy” and for “a theocratic government based on Old Testament law.” American Vision is pro-democracy and pro-theocracy. All governments are theocratic. There is some god-principle governments use to make and validate laws. The SPLC wants to be one of the organizations that makes the ultimate determination.

As Christians, we believe that change in society must come from the bottom-up, not from the top-down, neither from the government of the Church nor the State. The first book I wrote, God and Government, spells this out in exacting detail. We do not believe, however, in the principled that the “voice of the people is the voice of god.” That is, we do not believe that majority opinion is the basis of law. It’s interesting that the SPLC is critical of voting referendums—as in the Proposition 8 vote—that are anti-homosexual marriage. This puts the SPLC in the anti-democracy camp and the pro-theocracy camp. They believe that judges, America’s new gods, should determine what is good and evil. Then there’s the larger problem of America’s founders and their opinions on democracy. More about this tomorrow.

“The nationalism of democracy,” Carl F. Henry writes, gave us “fascism and communism.” [3] In another place, Henry laments that the inaction of Christians the world politically leads to a vacuum in the democratic process that is quickly filled by opponents of the democratic process.

Evangelical inactivity in political affairs contrasts so sharply with the subversive exploitation of democratic processes that it indirectly contributes a setting where left-wing strategists can more easily gain their political objectives. According to J. Edgar Hoover, astute director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation: “The Red Fascists have long followed the practice of making full use of democratic liberties: elections, lawful agitation, and propaganda, and free speech, press, assembly. Their basic premise: Reap every advantage possible.” [4]

Henry’s description fits the tactics of the SPLC to a tee. Democracy in and of itself cannot be the basis for morality.

The SPLC takes issue with American Vision’s statements regarding the biblical punishment for same-sex behavior. Anyone with a Bible, and there are hundreds of millions of them, can read the punishment for the behavior (Lev. 18:22; 20:13). The point in bringing this up is to remind people of what God thinks of homosexual behavior. This law is designed to wake up a degenerative culture. God will not be mocked. We saw this with the AIDS epidemic. More people died from AIDS in the United States, an almost exclusively self-inflicted homosexual disease (500,000+), than died from execution for homosexuality in the Bible (0). The recognition of homosexuality as a morally acceptable alternative lifestyle has been more destructive on homosexuals than biblical law ever could be.

We at American Vision are about redemption. We want to see people who have been seduced by the supposed normalcy of homosexual behavior to break free from the deception. The Bible notes that some had done this (1 Cor. 6:9-11). If homosexuality is treated as a minor sin or no sin at all, there is no incentive to break free, so American Vision follows the NT prescription that “all Scripture,” speaking of the Old Testament, “is God breathed and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16-17).

In reality, the SPLC is in the fund raising business, so it finds groups that speak directly on contemporary issues and attacks them as the greatest menaces to society. It has gone from tracking the movements of racists, skinhead groups, and the KKK that number in the hundreds to creating hysteria over mainstream value ministries like American Vision. Pro-homosexual newspapers and websites have been working overtime to rev up their robot-like followers to repeat the rhetoric of the SPLC. Of course, most of this is done for fund raising purposes. It’s no wonder that the SPLC is flush with cash. [5] In 2009 it had an endowment of nearly 200 million dollars (see here). Ultimately, the tactic is to strike fear in middle-America so the checks keep rolling in. Most communities don’t see skinheads or even KKKers, so the SPLC needs a new tangible enemy to keep the coffers full.

According to the SPLC, hate has gone mainstream, so you better send a donation before these guys come and get you, too! Am I making this up? I counted twelve categories of giving on their website. The SPLC is a fund raising industry designed to silence Christians on moral issues. There’s not much money in fighting real hate groups now that only a few of the real haters are still around. When you go the SPLC site, the first thing you will see is a pop-up add to donate to the anti-hate cause. (Image at right.)

You might remember that the SPLC is the same group that went after Chief Justice Roy Moore because he refused to remove the Ten Commandment monument from the court house in Montgomery, Alabama. He was one of their favorite whipping boys. Without God’s commandments, everything is up for grabs except for condemning a worldview that says everything is up for grabs. Early in its history, the SPLC probably did some good work in the area of civil rights. This might have something to do with the fact that “Poverty” is in the organization’s name. But there’s not much money in poverty these days, unless you’re Jesse Jackson. The group has lost focus in recent years and has decided to persecute and libel Christian groups who hold to a moral worldview that opposes the legalization of sodomy and homosexual marriage.

Now that Christians have awakened from the slumber of a false privatized spirituality and are applying their beliefs culturally and politically, the homosexual community is enraged, and SPLC is one of its enabling institutions because it carries so much clout with liberals. It’s OK for homosexuals to barnstorm the country and threaten businesses and politicians with their own political clout, but beware of anyone who opposes the homosexual agenda.

Homosexuals will claim that their cause is a “civil rights” issue, similar to the hard-fought struggle that Blacks have gone through. The analogy is a false one. Homosexuality is what people do. The euphemism “gay” has been used by the homosexual movement to hide the fact that homosexuality is really same-sex sex. To describe what homosexuals do with their “sexual equipment” would turn off many readers at this point. The very nature of the act is unnatural by definition, and any relationship based on same-sex intercourse is “against nature,” that is, against the way God made us as sexual beings (Gen. 2:18-25; Rom. 1:26-27). This is why Colin Powell wrote some years ago how it is inappropriate to link homosexual behavior with the civil rights movement. He said: “Skin color is a benign, non‑behavioral characteristic. Sexual orientation is perhaps the most profound of human behavioral characteristics. Comparison of the two is a convenient but invalid argument.” [6]

The SPLC is out to silence Christian groups that believe homosexuality is unnatural, immoral, and hurtful to individuals who are seduced by the so-called alternative lifestyle. Groups like American Vision believe that those who engage in same-sex sex are rebelling against God’s moral order.

  1. Bowers vs. Hardwick (1986), 478 US 186, 92 L Ed 2d 140, 106 S Ct 2841, reh den (US) 92 L Ed 2d 779, 107 S. Ct 29., 147‑48. The plaintiffs in the Hardwick case were caught engaging in the act of sodomy only after the police entered the house on an unrelated case.[]
  2. The Writings of George Washington, Bicentennial Edition (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1934), (March 1 through May 31, 1778), 11:83-84.[]
  3. Carl F.H. Henry, God Revelation and Authority, 6 vols. (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1979), 4:8.[]
  4. Carl F.H. Henry, Aspects of Christian Social Ethics (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964), 127.[]
  5. Richard A. Viguerie and David Franke, America’s Right Turn: How Conservatives Used New and Alternative Media to Take Power (Chicago, IL: Bonus Books, 2004), 146–150.[]
  6. Quoted in World (September 26, 1992), 5.[]

Join the email family.

We won't spam, rent, sell, or share
your information in any way.

Join the support family.

Donate Now
linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram
The American Vision