How Did WND’s Lively Hate LGBT People During Pride Month?

WorldNetDaily columnist Scott Lively’s Pride Month of anti-LGBT hate actually began a couple days earlier, with a May 29 column describing how, after a move to Springfield, Mass., to start a ministry, he “discovered an official ‘Gay Pride’ banner hanging from the lamppost in the same place and manner as the annual Christmas banners.” He cheerfully added:

At 4:30 p.m. that very day a massive tornado touched down in Westfield (where Anne and I had lived the first couple of months after our arrival) and carved a 39 mile path of destruction through West Springfield, South Springfield and several towns eastward. It barely missed the Old First Church, but ripped through the rest of Court Square right where the offending banner had hung. The way I see it, God tore down that particular flag Himself.

He failed to mention that the tornado killed three people, so it seems Lively is happy that innocent people died just so that a rainbow banner could be removed from his vision — they were just collateral damage to advance his hateful ideology, apparently.

In a related cheering of destruction, he referenced the tornado again in his May 31 column, then noted that he as he drove past a strip club called Scores, he repeated an “imprecatory prayer” against the club “and then asked God why He had never answered any of my imprecatory prayers against this and other targets.” He added: “I received no immediate answer, but less than 24 hours later Scores was completely destroyed in a natural gas explosion – and I mean completely destroyed, as in Christ’s prophecy about the Temple in Matthew 24:2, ‘not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.'” He didn’t mention that 18 people were injured in the blast; he probably thinks they deserved to be wounded and maimed.

Lively’s first column of hate in Pride Month proper was on June 5, in which he tried to liken being transgender to transhumanism:

I have been alone in linking transhumanism directly to the LGBT movement, contending that the LGBT agenda represents not just a coalition of sexual dysfunctions but a chronology of stages in the deconstruction of God’s created order (from the tips of the branches toward its roots), and that “transhumanism” represents a hidden “T” contained within “transgenderism” in the LGBT acronym.

Transgenderism is the penultimate stage of deconstruction of the civilization God made for us – erasing the human recognition that we are created male and female in His image (Genesis 1:27).

Transhumanism is the final stage – eliminating through genetic modification God’s wall of separation between humans and animals as distinct “kinds” (Genesis 1:11-25). Transhumanists perceive themselves as wiping the earth clean of God’s “mistakes,” restoring the blank canvas of Genesis 1:6-10 and creating their own perfected utopia in which they are immortal.

This is not hyperbole but an actual plan currently being pursued by the World Economic Forum’s Yuval Noah Harari (whom I have labeled the best candidate for the end-times False Prophet I’ve seen in my lifetime). Significantly, Harari is an admitted homosexual in a counterfeit “marriage” to another man.

Lively then tried to maliciously suggest that transgender people are pedophiles:

Sadly, with transgenderism also comes pedophilia, because the tactical framework for normalizing transgenderism is making gender self-determination for children a legally enforceable civil right. Assumed as fact in all their rhetoric and public policy arguments is a child’s inalienable right to self-assess his or her “true” gender identity and to force society, especially parents, to honor it. But “children’s rights” has always been the back door to the normalization of adult/child sex, “The repeal of all laws governing age of consent” being one of the last unachieved agenda items of the 1972 Gay Rights Platform (Section 2, Item 7). And in terms of defeating public opposition, it’s a relatively small step from the right of a child to choose sexual mutilation to the right to choose their sexual partners of any age or type.

But, importantly, pedophilia is not the worst aspect of transgender normalization: the worst is the transhumanist worldview in which children who become cognitively divorced from the reality of the natural order regarding sexuality and physiology willingly become guinea-pigs in the Yuval Harari’s nightmare of human cyborg experimentation because they no longer have any sense of authentic humanness.

Lively’s June 9 column began with some self-aggrandizement of his anti-LGBT hate:

I am one of the last remaining front-line leaders of the pro-family movement that started during the Reagan Revolution in the 1980s and largely ended with the Obergefell v. Hodges “gay marriage” betrayal by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2015. For the next few years I thought the culture war was pretty much over and we’d lost everything, but then as the left repositioned its armies to begin normalizing transgender insanity, a new generation of conservatives arose and formed today’s anti-groomer movement. Seeing a new glimmer of hope, I’d like to help them succeed where my generation failed, by offering some hard-won insights from a life on the battlefield.

He then smeared people who don’t hate LGBT people as much as he does as “groomers”:

This article addresses the second force and is inspired by this week’s news of a revolt by Muslim and Christian parents against the forced LGBT indoctrination of their children by Montgomery County Maryland Public Schools. The spark that ignited that particular conflict is a new school policy that eliminates the long-standing right of parents to opt their children out of exposure to LGBT “grooming” resources that normalize homosexuality and transgenderism.

[…]

At the command level it is essential to identify and expose the Sheiks – the George Soros, shot-caller types (big and small) – which is sometimes harder said than done because they don’t want public scrutiny. Infiltration of the opponents’ organizations, James O’Keefe-style, may be the only way to find the big fish. I’m not a fan of so-called “gay conservatives” on the grounds that anyone who defends sexual-orientation theory as valid science and defines homosexual conduct as equivalent to heterosexual normalcy is part of the problem, not the solution (regardless of their position on other public policy issues). BUT for true conservatives who admit their same-sex inclinations are dysfunctional even if they can’t yet overcome them, there is cultural redemption in secret-agent espionage against Marxist evil, using their past lives to establish credibility.

In the end, whether we’re called pro-family or anti-groomer, our agenda is all about saving the children from homo-fascist tyranny, and we all should do whatever we can to serve that cause.

Lively spent his June 12 column being angry that the government won’t hate LGBT people like he does:

In the same week Trump was indicted on blatantly bogus and political charges, bombshell new evidence of Joe Biden’s glaring, pervasive and long-standing criminality earned not even the suggestion of an investigation. Instead of the FBI and CIA enforcing the law against their co-conspirator boss, both agencies changed the subject by highlighting their celebrations of “Pride Month.” 

[…]

We have Bill Clinton to thank for creating this particularly foul cesspool of the federal swamp. It was Clinton’s Executive Order 12968 on Aug. 2, 1995, that ended the long-standing ban on top-secret security clearance for homosexuals – opening the floodgates for the LGBT takeover of U.S. Intelligence that then ensued.

Why had that ban been U.S. policy in the first place? The common wisdom holds it was based exclusively on the fact that homosexuals were especially at risk of blackmail in an era when that lifestyle was (rightfully) discouraged by society. But the greater, less recognized reason was the affinity homosexuals have always had for political intrigue and espionage. That affinity alone wouldn’t be so bad from the perspective of national intelligence agencies, but the corollary tendency of homosexuals to put self-interest and loyalty to each other above national interests made them an unacceptably bad risk.

Lively offered no evidence to support that claim.

We’ve already noted Lively’s bizarre claim in his June 15 column that misogynistic “incels” are going transgender. In his June 19 column, he purported to offer “the authentic Jewish view of homosexuality” despite the fact that despite a Jewish and Catholic heritage, “I am neither Jewish nor Catholic” and “I do not claim a right to speak for the Jews of today.” Yet he did so anyway, referencing his discredited book “The Pink Swastika,” which purported to claim that “the Nazi Party is best understood as a neo-pagan, homosexual cult.” He then huffed:

It is estimated that only about 10 to 20% of American Jews are conservative, so it is understandable that by the sheer force of numbers American Judaism is assumed to be fully supportive of so-called “gay pride” and the widespread normalization of LGBT deviance. One might be excused for thinking the same about Christianity if it were measured only by the so-called “mainstream” denominations. But as affirmed by the eminent rabbis cited above, the authenticity and therefore weight of one’s religious opinions is based solely on their alignment with the sacred writings on which the religion is based.

Thus, the authentic Jewish (and Christian) view of homosexuality is that it is an abomination unequivocally condemned by God – and it matters not how many confused and arrogant people of either faith tradition, no matter how “credentialed” they may be, disagree with HIM.

Lively’s June 23 column indulged his gay-Nazi fixation again, focusing on a claim that one of the neo-Nazis who infamously led a parade in Skokie, Ill., who was later convicted of pedophilia. He then outed himself as a partial Holocaust denier:

To be clear, I am a staunch defender of the truth of the Jewish Holocaust – which was the deadly fruit in Nazi Germany of the exact same eugenics movement that spawned the abortion industry in the U.S. (and today pushes “transhumanism” worldwide).  But I am a vehement opponent of the Gay Holocaust Hoax, which is a gross exaggeration of the deplorable but relatively minor mistreatment of a small minority of German “gays.” Kevin Abrams and I wrote “The Pink Swastika” to debunk that fraud, but we couldn’t stop the more devious “gay” exploitation of the Jewish Holocaust through control of the museums. Even today, the landing page of the US Holocaust Museum in D.C. (whose hugely influential first director was openly “gay” Klaus Mueller) features the Gay Holocaust lie.

Lively spent his June 26 column explaining that he hates gay marriage so much, he refuses to read the Supreme Court decision that made it legal:

I’m writing this letter in the early hours of June 26, the anniversary of the murder of marriage in America in the Kennedy majority’s 5-4 SCOTUS ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) inventing a constitutional right to “gay marriage” by judicial fiat. You’ve heard of “fiat money” created from nothing? Well, the Obergefell ruling was “fiat morality.”

In protest, I have never read the Obergefell decision because I hold it to be illegitimate on its face – not only because it’s blatantly unconstitutional, but because two members of the Kennedy majority, Ginsberg and Kagan, grossly violated their ethical duty of impartiality in having performed same-sex “weddings” during the pendency of the case. Before that ruling was issued, I led a protest in front of the Supreme Court with a sign reading “Ginsberg and Kagan Don’t Get to Choose – Biased Judges Must Recuse” (see below.) Their betrayal of judicial ethics was the most egregious in the court’s history.

Obergefell v. Hodges is the coffin within which the institution of true, natural marriage has lain dead and decomposing since that day, draped, oh so appropriately, under a purple funeral shawl.

He then had another Tinky Winky meltdown:

Years ago the late Jerry Falwell was mercilessly mocked for asserting the true fact that a pop-culture toy called Tinky Winky (a character in the children’s “Teletubbies” TV show) was designed to groom kids as LGBT allies/experimenters. Tinky Winky (a boy) was colored purple, sported the “gay” movement’s inverted purple triangle on his head, and often carried a red purse. Unknown to most normal people, per Wikipedia: “Twink is gay slang for a gay man who is usually (but not always) in his late teens to 20s whose traits may include a slim to average physique, a youthful appearance that may belie an older age, having little or no body hair, flamboyancy and general physical attractiveness.”

In other words, a “Twink” is an effeminate teen boy, just like its cartoonish derivative “Tinky Winky” (and the children who identified with him) were intended to become when they grew up. And isn’t that exactly what happened to a large number of so-called “soy boys” of that generation? How many of those young men who grew up watching the child drag queen Tinky Winky cavort on television are the same ones now “transitioning” into fake women? Falwell was absolutely right that purple Tinky Winky was a tool of leftist social engineering, i.e, “grooming.”

Lively has ranted about Tinky Winky and “Teletubbies” before.