Dads: Calvin Klein disrespects you and your family

Dads: Calvin Klein disrespects you and your family

Calvin Klein has produced a highly offensive billboard ad currently displayed in a high traffic area of New York City. It may be coming to a city near you soon.

A New York Daily News describes it this way: “The ad depicts a topless young woman lying on top of a bare-chested boy while kissing a second shirtless male. They’re on a sofa, and below them a third male – pants and shirt unbuttoned – is lying on the floor.”

Click here to see the billboard ad.

Take Action

Calvin Klein is owned by Phillips-Van Heusen Corporation (PVH), which approves this type of ad in public areas where families and children are sure to see it.

After sending your email, call PVH and let them know you are offended by their disrespect for family values and common decency. Their number is 866-513-0513.

Send Your Letter Now!

Thank you for caring enough to get involved. If you find our efforts worth supporting, would you consider making a small tax-deductible donation to help us continue?


Donald E. Wildmon, Chairman

P.S. Please forward this to your family and friends!

The “Evolution” of Communication!??

evolution of communication

Principle: God builds relationally, and so must we.

Maybe I’m just getting old, but I remember the days when we used to communicate with one another via good ol’ fashioned email! It was so liberating to dispense with all of the intricacies of face-to-face communication. No more worrying about body language, which they say accounts for over 50% of what actually gets communicated. Never mind intonation, which is reported to convey almost 40% of the meaning of what we communicate. With email, all we need is words: text, alphanumeric characters, perhaps the occasional emoticon – leaving the recipient to interpret our message in whatever way they see fit! Let them use their imagination, as they should! Email: beautiful in its simplicity, allowing us to communicate one-tenth of the content with half of the effort. Talk about a no-brainer!

View article…

Stop the Bailout of Judge Sotomayor

Stop the Bailout of Judge Sotomayor

Today, the Supreme Court handed down a decision (Ricci v. Destefano) that highlights for us the dangers at play on the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. You can click here to read Concerned Women for America’s (CWA) press release on the ruling.

In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court overturned Sotomayor for upholding a plainly discriminatory practice by the city of New Haven, Connecticut, where white and Hispanic firefighters were denied promotions because not enough African-Americans scored high enough to earn promotions on a racially neutral test. The Court said, “Whatever the City’s ultimate aim — however well intentioned or benevolent it might have seemed — the City made its employment decision because of race. The City rejected the test results solely because the higher scoring candidates were white.”

But Judge Sotomayor’s support of the city’s discriminatory practice has not happened in isolation. Judge Sotomayor has made no apology for her apparent bias in favor of minorities and has been very candid in her remarks on what she thinks is the proper role of a judge. She has said, “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.” She’s also said, “Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.”

She has expressed other radical views regarding the Bill of Rights. Sen. Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) said after her visit with him that she “was unwilling to say the Second Amendment protects a fundamental right that applies to all Americans.” Several pro-abortion groups had expressed concern about Sotomayor’s scarce judicial opinions on abortion, but after visiting with several pro-abortion Senators, she apparently assured them of her allegiance. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) said, “I was very pleased that the judge indicated that in the past that she has had a great respect for precedent and that Roe v. Wade is established law.” On the precedent established by Roe v. Wade, Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-California) said, “I believe she has a real respect for precedent and … if that is really true then I will agree with her, and I believe it is.”

These concerns should remind us of the crucial importance of Supreme Court nominations. Senate Democrats have made clear their intentions of ramming through her nomination very quickly. We must be engaged now!

We have already seen what happens when we remain idle while our liberties are taken away by unelected judges. We must not let this happen again.

As senators are back home this week for the July 4th recess, make sure they hear from you about how concerned you are with the nomination of Judge Sotomayor and ask them to do everything in their power to make sure this nomination is not rammed through like the Senate did with the Bailout Bill that contained those million dollar bonuses buried within its pages.

Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nevada) has said they plan to vote on her nomination before the August recess. Let your Senators know this is not acceptable. We have provided a flyer (click here to download) you can hand out to family and friends highlighting the irresponsible way the Senate leadership is handling Sotomayor’s nomination.

Call your Senators at their local offices today (click here to find out their contact information) and let them know your concerns about her nomination and the fact that they are trying to rush her nomination through. Tell them that you want a thorough examination of Judge Sotomayor’s record and that you will be watching their involvement on this great debate about the proper role of a judge.

You can click here for an interview on the urgency of this nomination and the bigger battle for the proper view of our judiciary with Mario Diaz, Esq., CWA’s Policy Director for Legal Issues, and Manuel Miranda, Chairman of the Third Branch Conference. For more information on this issue from CWA, visit our Sotomayor page at

“Then I commanded your judges at the time, saying, ‘Hear the cases between your brethren, and judge righteously between a man and his brother or the stranger who is with him. You shall not show partiality in judgment; you shall hear the small as well as the great; you shall not be afraid in any man’s presence, for judgment is God’s.” Deuteronomy 1:16:17

House Committee Ventures Capitol on Social Issues

House Committee Ventures Capitol on Social Issues

If you’re looking for a bill that sums up this administration’s anti-family views, the House Financial Services Subcommittee has produced the perfect candidate. In its appropriations debate, abortion, marijuana, domestic partnerships, and school vouchers are all topics of consideration. As it currently stands, the bill submitted by the Financial Services panel (which oversees the District of Columbia) took a giant step toward funding a culture of death in the nation’s capital.

To the dismay of pro-lifers, liberals on the committee heeded the President’s request to overturn the Dornan Amendment, which has banned taxpayer-funded abortions in D.C. for years. As FRC has argued, subsiding abortion will only increase it–a result at odds with the President’s supposed promise to “reduce abortions.”

Unfortunately, the bill only gets worse from there. On school choice, the draft provides just enough funding–$12 million in fiscal 2010–for students who are already enrolled in the program, effectively shutting out any new applicants. Adding to the outcry, the panel also paved the way for legalized marijuana in D.C., stripping language from the bill that would outlaw it. If the provision passes, it would be up to the District to decide whether or not it allows residents to possess or distribute the drug.

The bill’s next stop is the House Appropriations Committee, where members expect to debate it on July 7. At the moment, no bill number has been assigned. Stay tuned for more details and information that will help you contact your representatives.

Additional Resources The Washington Examiner: House subcommittee OKs pot on D.C. ballot

The President’s Rainbow Connection

The President’s Rainbow Connection

“Gay Pride Month” may be coming to an end, but we cannot say the same for the President’s pandering. Today, the administration commemorated the 40th anniversary of the Stonewall Rebellion with a special LGBT reception in the East Room of the White House. Several activists say they will use the occasion to push for faster progress on their agenda. Meanwhile, FRC is overwhelmed by the concessions this President has already made, including changes to partner benefit, passport, and Census policies. Adding to our outrage is the elevation of Kevin Jennings, founder of the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), to head the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools at the Department of Education. To fuel the fire against his appointment, FRC published an ad in the Washington Examiner, which highlights his hatred of religion and his history of drug abuse. In conjunction with the campaign, Human Events published my op-ed, “Kevin Jennings–Unsafe for America’s Schools” in today’s edition. To see our ad or read my column, visit Also, stop by FRC’s brand new site, to learn more about him or to contact your leaders.

Additional Resources Sign the Jennings Petition today! Human Events: Kevin Jennings — Unsafe for America’s Schools

On Sotomayor, Objections Sustained

On Sotomayor, Objections Sustained

In a ruling that could have as much impact on the future of Sonia Sotomayor as of affirmative action, the U.S. Supreme Court released its verdict on Ricci v. DeStefano today. The 5-4 decision, which overturns a previous ruling by Sotomayor, should be a devastating blow to the President’s first pick for the high court. Five justices sided with the group of 18 Connecticut firefighters, who were denied promotions because of their race.

To determine who was eligible for advancement in New Haven, the city asked its firefighters to take a test. When not enough African-Americans passed it, officials threw out the results–effectively refusing a promotion to the white and Hispanic firefighters who qualified for one. Not surprisingly, the group who was snubbed for advancement sued, arguing that they were victims of reverse discrimination.

On appeal, Judge Sotomayor ruled that the city was justified in tossing the test result. Legal experts were stunned–not only by her panel’s verdict, but by how Sotomayor arrived at her conclusion. Using a tiny loophole in the 1964 Civil Rights Act, she “seized on a relatively small part of Title VII and read it in a way that swallows the anti-discrimination focus of the overwhelming bulk of the [statute],” writes Roger Clegg, President of the Center for Equal Opportunity.

The President’s nominee not only turned her back on the Civil Rights Act but also on the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees equal protection under the law. To many, this case confirms Sotomayor’s penchant for judicial activism. Since her appeals ruling, there has been widespread concern over how she handled the case. Even the Obama Justice Department called on the Court to reverse her panel’s decision. Today, the justices did just that, writing in the majority opinion that “[f]ear of litigation alone cannot justify an employer’s reliance on race to the detriment of individuals who passed the examinations and qualified for promotions.”

In the weeks since her nomination, Sotomayor has proven to be “deeply immersed in identity politics,” as Clegg calls it. A judge who distorts the law to fit her own personal prejudices has no place on the nation’s highest court. I shudder to think where her politically correct tendencies would lead on matters of abortion or religious freedom. Let’s just say that if this case was a test of Sotomayor’s eligibility for promotion, she failed.

Additional Resources The Washington Examiner: Roger Clegg on Sotomayor’s selective reading reflects her judicial activism

PepsiCo sponsors four more gay pride parades (I called and left my comments, takes only a minute)

Please help us get this information into the hands of as many people as possible by forwarding it to your entire e-mail list of family and friends.

PepsiCo sponsors four more gay pride parades

June 18, 2009

Following their sponsorship of the New York Gay Pride Parade scheduled for June 27, PepsiCo has agreed to sponsor four more gay pride parades – Atlanta, Dallas, Phoenix and Cleveland. Click here to see the kind of parade PepsiCo is sponsoring.

PepsiCo shows its employees caught in this destructive and harmful lifestyle no compassion, no support to help them leave it. Rather,PepsiCo spends huge sums of money to promote the lifestyle.

AFA has asked PepsiCo to be neutral in the culture war regarding the homosexual agenda and the legalization of homosexual marriage, but PepsiCo adamantly refuses to do so.

PepsiCo requires employees to attend sexual orientation and gender diversity training. It supports homosexual groups with gifts totaling over $1 million. PepsiCo refuses to give any money to groups such as Parents and Friends of Ex-Gay and Gays (PFOX) that work to help individuals change their sexual behavior.

Take Action!

Sign the Boycott Pepsi Pledge. After signing the pledge, please call Pepsi (914-253-2000 or 1-800-433-2652) and tell the company you will boycott its products until it stops promoting the homosexual agenda.
Call the Pepsi bottler nearest you and ask it to stop supporting the homosexual agenda.
• Pepsi’s products include Pepsi soft drinks, Frito-Lay chips and snacks (800-352-4477), Quaker Oats (800-367-6287), Tropicana (800-237-7799) and Gatorade (800-884-2867).
Print the Boycott Pepsi Pledge and distribute it.
Forward this e-mail to your friends and family so they will know about Pepsi’s support of the homosexual agenda. Millions of people are not aware of Pepsi’s support of homosexual organizations.

Thank you for caring enough to get involved. If you feel our efforts are worthy of support, would you consider making a small tax-deductible contribution to help us continue?



Donald E. Wildmon,
Founder and Chairman
American Family Association