The rise of the LGBTQ movement has turned the tables in American culture. Say anything even mildly critical of LGBTQs and it can cost you your livelihood. But while it’s powerful, the LGBTQ movement is also the most sensitive social movement in the country.

Somewhere along the way, the month of June was designated Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered, and Queer (LGBTQ) Pride month. Friends, we must beware the perversion that boasts in this kind of pride.

Still, it is celebrated all over the country by governments, businesses, etc. The colors of the rainbow are used to signify the LGBTQ movement. Parades commemorating it go on in many places. There is no question that the LGBTQ movement is mainstream America now.

In fact, this group has power that exceeds its numbers. It has been generally accepted for decades that the LGBTQ group represents 2.7% of the population. If you mix in Millennials, that percentage goes to 4.5%, according to Gallup.

Whatever the percentage is, this group has banded together to become one of the most powerful political forces in our time. They control the entertainment industry as well, allowing for only positive portrayals on television and movies. And despite being only 4.5% of the population, on prime-time television nearly 9% of all characters are LGBTQ. No other group can command such treatment.

The rise of the LGBTQ movement has turned the tables in American culture. Before the 1990s, homosexuality was generally considered abnormal. Certainly not something to be proud of. It was seen as shameful. My, how the times have changed. Today the only ones shamed are those who dare speak out in favor of traditional moral roles of men and women. Say anything even mildly critical of LGBTQs and it can cost you your livelihood.

Remember back in 2014 when a man named Michael Sam was selected in the NFL draft? Because he was the first openly gay player drafted, the media made a big deal out of it. When he was drafted, the mouth-to-mouth kiss with his boyfriend was shown on ESPN live.

A day after this happened, I read the following on a website:

“Miami Dolphins defensive back Don Jones tweeted ‘omg’ and ‘horrible’ in reaction to the ESPN video and then was swiftly fined an undisclosed amount and suspended from team activities until he completed ‘sensitivity training.’ Jones subsequently deleted the tweets, made his Twitter account private, and issued a public apology to Sam, calling his biased comments about the gay player ‘inappropriate.'”

This is what I mean by costing a person his or her livelihood if you say anything critical about homosexuality. A Miami Dolphins player said what millions of Americans were thinking and he was fined, suspended, and sent to educational “training.”

The LGBTQ movement, while powerful, is also the most sensitive social movement in the country. Make any indication of disapproval and you get labeled a “bigot” or a “hater” and publicly shamed. It’s really scary for a lot of Americans who are forced to attend corporate “diversity training,” which is code for force-feeding the LGBTQ agenda on them.

The truth is the LGBTQ activists have basically conquered the Western world. The only thing they lack is shutting down the Christian church, which still believes that homosexuality is a sin because the Bible teaches as much. Read Romans, Chapter 1.

The Scripture says this behavior is unnatural, immoral, and unhealthy. Christian or not, everyone pretty much knows this, even if they are afraid to say so publicly. God made male for female sexually. As for the transgendered, they have serious issues that cause them profound confusion. It’s really tragic.

While Bruce Jenner may think he is a woman, the rest of us should not be told we must pretend Bruce Jenner is a woman or else we hate Bruce Jenner.

Related to this entire issue, I urge you to be aware of the “Equality Act” legislation now pending in the U.S. Congress. I don’t have space for all the details here, but if passed by Congress it would force the LGBTQ agenda on all Americans using the full power of federal government.

It’s an extremely dangerous piece of legislation. Democrats have already passed it in the House; but at least for now, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has vowed to block it in that body. And President Donald Trump has vowed to veto it should it ever make it to his desk.

But be watchful, friends. Call your two senators and insist that they vote “no” on the so-called “Equality Act.” The pride that produced it is really nothing to boast about.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to send a message to our U.S. Senators to urge him/her to oppose the federal Equality Act (H.R. 5) which seeks to amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to include protections for an individual’s perceived sex, “sexual orientation,” or “gender identity.” If you know the name of your local official, you can also call the U.S. Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121 and ask the operator to connect you with his/her office to leave a message.

Based on the response from the left, you would think that the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court would virtually guarantee the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Why, then, are some conservative and pro-life groups opposing his confirmation?

On the positive side, many pro-life leaders reacted enthusiastically to the nomination of Justice Kavanaugh, including Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the highly-respected Susan B. Anthony List.

She said, “President Trump has made another outstanding choice in nominating Judge Brett Kavanaugh to replace Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, keeping his promise to nominate only originalist judges to the Court.”

In her opinion, Kavanaugh was “an experienced, principled jurist,” who has a “strong record of protecting life and constitutional rights.”

Many others were enthusiastic as well, including conservative think tanks and long-term pro-life leaders.

On the negative side, Jane Coaston wrote an article for Vox.com explaining, “Why social conservatives are disappointed that Trump picked Brett Kavanaugh.”

She pointed to a number of top leaders in the conservative and pro-life movement who had reservations about Kavanaugh or who called for outright opposition.

Upon hearing of President Trump’s nomination of Kavanaugh, the National Review’s David French wrote, “I’ll defend [Kavanaugh] vigorously from unfair critiques tomorrow, but tonight I join many conservatives in a slight sigh of regret. There was a better choice.”

Tim Wildmon, President of the highly influential American Family Association, wrote, “AFA has opposed the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S Supreme Court for some very valid reasons. We are deeply concerned about how he might ultimately rule on issues related to abortion and religious liberty. For these reasons, we consider this nomination to represent a four-star appointment when it could have been five-star.”

Other groups, like Columbia [South Carolina] Christians for Life sent out e-blasts with titles like, “ROE VS. WADE protector Kavanaugh: Another red flag for Jesuit-educated, Jesuit school director, BRETT KAVANAUGH.” (This was sent out August 30.)

Another pro-life activist sent out links to this video, with this warning: “President Trump broke his campaign promise to pro-lifers when he nominated Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. Ricardo Davis of Georgia Right to Life calls Kavanaugh’s pro-abortion position ‘morally reprehensible’ and urges pro-lifers and conservatives to demand Kavanaugh’s withdrawal and for Trump to replace him with a real pro-life nominee such as Amy Coney Barrett.”

How can we make sense of this?

On the one hand, there is agreement that someone like Justice Amy Coney Barrett, if appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court, would definitely vote to overturn Roe v. Wade should the opportunity present itself. The downside is that many believe that in today’s climate, despite the Republican majority, she would not have been confirmed.

Others have suggested that it’s unlikely that there will be a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade as much as an incremental challenge. What if something like the Fetal Heartbeat Bill became law and was challenged up to the U.S. Supreme Court? How would Kavanaugh vote on that?

The real answer is that we simply do not know what a U.S. Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh would do.

According to Thomas Jipping, Deputy Director of the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and a Senior Legal Fellow, Kavanaugh’s “record meets the Schumer standard of a judge who does not predictably rule for a particular side. That is because Kavanaugh is the kind of judge who follows the law rather than his personal views.”

What, then, are we to make of the varied and passionate responses to Justice Kavanaugh? Does the left have reason to fear? Does the right have reason to rue a missed opportunity?

Here are a few things that seem clear.

First, we can be almost certain that Justice Kavanaugh will be a far better friend of the U.S. Constitution and of conservative values than any judge a President Hillary Clinton would have appointed. That is a very big positive.

Second, we who are pro-life do well not to put our ultimate trust in a man (Kavanaugh) or an institution (the U.S. Supreme Court) to change the direction of our nation. (This is not to deny the importance of both the man and the institution. It is simply to bring perspective.)

Third, it is possible that Kavanaugh himself cannot guarantee how he will rule if confirmed. There have been surprises in every direction from various appointees in the past, and even the best vetting process cannot guarantee the future.

Obviously, I hope that the leftist opposition to Kavanaugh is correct and that, should the opportunity arise, he would vote for life and for family and for our essential liberties.

But there may be a reason for the concern of some on the right, in which case we should be praying for Kavanaugh and the rest of the members of the Court that God would direct their hearts.

Scripture teaches that, “The king’s heart is a stream of water in the hand of the LORD; He turns it wherever He will.” Surely He can turn the hearts of U.S. Supreme Court justices as well.

More importantly, He can turn the hearts of a nation. That is the greater goal when it comes to cultivating a culture of life, and it must always remain the foremost goal for all of us who love life. As powerful as the Supreme Court has become, it alone cannot transform hearts.

This article was originally published at Townhall.com

Some pro-family organizations are rankled at the latest attempt by a liberal media outlet to co-opt two of America’s most beloved children’s pop culture icons on behalf of the pro-homosexual movement.

The Muppets Bert and Ernie, perhaps the most recognized characters of the popular U.S. children’s television program Sesame Street, have been used to commemorate last week’s landmark Supreme Court rulings on same-sex “marriage.” The latest issue of The New Yorker magazine shows the duo cuddling on their sofa as they watch a television featuring members of the United States Supreme Court.

The illustration, titled “Moment of Joy,” suggests the two characters were joyfully celebrating the recent rulings overturning the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and California’s Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage.

Dan Gainor, vice president of business and culture for the Media Research Center, believes children are the ultimate losers.

“What happened to the idea that we could have the innocence of youth?” asks Gainor. “Where children are not abused this way? Where the characters they grow up with and learn from are made gay?”

Gainor cites the move to reverse the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, a “Was Jesus Gay” article in the Huffington Post, and now the cover of The New Yorker magazine as examples of a major propaganda initiative to convince the world that a large number of the world’s population is “gay.”

“Literally, from pre-K all the way up to senior citizens, they use TV, they use radio, they use movies, they use news and entertainment and magazines,” says Gainor. “The whole goal is [to proclaim] that all male or all female friendships … must be gay. Their opinion is basically everybody must be gay. No, that’s actually not the case.”

Gainor is not alone in his criticism.

“It’s beneath contempt for a magazine of The New Yorker‘s stature to use Bert and Ernie to celebrate behavior which is immoral, unnatural and unhealthy,” says Tim Wildmon, president of the American Family Association (AFA). “The artist is just dead wrong. This is a tragic day for kids who will wind up in same-sex households.”

Wildmon notes a study by University of Texas researcher Mark Regnerus that concluded children raised in same-sex environments fared worse in 77 out of 80 outcomes when compared to children raised in intact homes by a mother and a father.

“The Bible has had it right from the beginning: marriage is between a man and a woman, and it’s the optimal nurturing environment for children. The New Yorker ought to be ashamed of itself,” concludes Wildmon.

On Friday, columnist Bryan Fischer accused the magazine of promoting “child endangerment” and “child abuse” by using the images of Bert and Ernie. Fischer also cited the findings of Mark Regnerus.

‘Great for our kids’?

The Ernie and Bert characters have lived together for several years in an apartment in the basement of 123 Sesame Street. Although they sleep in separate beds, they share a bedroom, which has led some to speculate the characters portray a homosexual relationship.

In 2011, after an online petition asking for Sesame Street to have Bert and Ernie “wed” went viral, the shows producers’ refuted that claim. That same petition also asked producers to add a transgender character.

“Bert and Ernie are best friends. They were created to teach preschoolers that people can be good friends with those who are very different from themselves,” Sesame Workshop said in a statement at the time. “Even though they are identified as male characters and possess many human traits and characteristics (as most Sesame Street Muppets do), they remain puppets, and do not have a sexual orientation.”

Jack Hunter, the artist who designed the cover and first posted his image on a Tumblr account, said: “It’s amazing to witness how attitudes on gay rights have evolved in my lifetime. This is great for our kids, a moment we can all celebrate.”

Originally posted at OneNewsNow.com.