Fiscally Libertarian, Socially Christian Soldier

Matt Welch | September 30, 2003

Tom McClintock's deputy campaign manager and former top legislative analyst, John Stoos, has a dream:

"I dream of the day when a strong Christian majority is elected to a city council somewhere in America. This council could then pass a resolution declaring that abortion is now illegal in their city," Stoos wrote this year in a conservative religious journal.

"Of course, the city attorney would quickly tell them that they cannot do this, at which point he should be fired and a good pro-life attorney should be hired to replace him," he continued. "Next up would be the police chief, who would likely say he could not enforce such a law. Again, the council should accept his letter of resignation and hire someone who would."

Stoos, a regular contributor to the Chalcedon Report, has also railed against that nefarious "homosexual agenda," according to the Los Angeles Times.

"If these sinners who desperately need the great gift of salvation in Jesus Christ can do so much in the power of the flesh to defend practices that the general public finds repulsive," Stoos wrote, "then what should we as Christians be doing to advance the kingdom of Christ in the power of the Holy Spirit?

"The critical question," he continued, "is whether we as Christians are prepared to show the same resolve and discipline and do the kind of hard work that the homosexuals have done over the past fifteen years promoting their ungodly agenda. Lord willing, in the power of the Holy Spirit, we can!"

In the April 2003 issue, Stoos wrote that "Christians are the only people who can restore the proper biblical understanding of government to our modern system."

McClintock told the Times: "I was not aware that he was writing for this journal and I'm upset to find that out�.That disturbs me greatly."

Comments

|9.30.03 @ 4:48AM|#

Kinda makes me wish I lived in CA, so I could vote for Arnie.

EgoLadenDilettanteGuy|9.30.03 @ 4:54AM|#

Makes me wish I could vote for Stoos.

JSM|9.30.03 @ 4:57AM|#

"The critical question," he continued, "is whether we as Christians are prepared to show the same resolve and discipline and do the kind of hard work that the homosexuals have done over the past fifteen years promoting their ungodly agenda...."

Mr Stoos, Christians had 2000 years promoting their agenda, only in the last 15 years has a group been able to cast off your irons of repression and persecution in order to promote anything else only true freedom would allow. Here's to Arnie wiping the voting pulpit with your ass!

JSM

dhex|9.30.03 @ 5:01AM|#

what i'm sort of curious about is outside of the area of school curriculum, which i'm sort of undecided on, what is this homosexual agenda? is the whole marriage thing really the third rail it's been made out to be?

some day i would like to be able to go to a wedding for my aunt and her girlfriend/partner/etc and i've never been able to figure out exactly how their nupitals would threaten anyone or anything.

|9.30.03 @ 5:22AM|#

With all this talk of the Homosexual Agenda, I have but one question:

What is the scheduled lunch break?

thoreau|9.30.03 @ 5:28AM|#

Jon Stewart recently said about gay marriage (paraphrase) "You know, everybody's upset about gay marriage. I guess they're going to make it mandatory. I mean, otherwise I can't see why anybody would be upset about it. Please, don't make me marry a gay man. My wife will not be happy."

And a few years earlier the Daily Show got their hands on a copy of the gay agenda. It started with getting up early in the morning and exercising, eating breakfast, doing some recruiting work, breaking for lunch, a nap, more recruiting work, and then dancing all night long.

Andy|9.30.03 @ 5:30AM|#

Let's be fair to McClintock. If you read the article, you'll know that he doesn't support Stoos' vision. Guilt by association is dangerous; don't fall for this sort of smear tactic.

Mark|9.30.03 @ 5:53AM|#

Andy: If I agree with you that McClintock was ignorant of Stoos' views, will you agree with me that makes him a really stupid politician who deserves his fringe status? What politician in this day and age doesn't do even a cursory background check on his top staff. Cripes, a simple Google search would have done it...

Mark Fulwiler|9.30.03 @ 6:05AM|#

And conservatives wonder why they can't win anything in California...

Andy|9.30.03 @ 6:18AM|#

Mark, OK, I'll agree with you.

Jough|9.30.03 @ 6:31AM|#

That lunch break would consist of either sausage or clam...not that there's anything wrong with that (as Seinfeld would say).


(Durango95 - cool handle - pure horror show)

boifromtroy|9.30.03 @ 6:38AM|#

Other items on the homosexual agenda...

5:30 AM Cardio at the gym; read LA Times
10:15 AM Cigarette Break
6:00 PM Weights - Chest and biceps
8:00 PM Cocktails at Micky's
8:30 PM Dinner with new "friends"
10:00 PM Desert

Warren|9.30.03 @ 7:57AM|#

Doot doot doodle doo de doot doot doo doot

|9.30.03 @ 8:09AM|#

Oh, the squeezie, squeezie, squeezie-po
the squeezie-po, the squeezie-po
the squeezie, squeezie, squeezie-po
the squeezie-po, squeezie-po

Steve|9.30.03 @ 9:26AM|#

I actually liked McClintock more after reading this article. He seemed genuinely shocked and pissed off that this loon was working for him.

Kevin Carson|9.30.03 @ 11:48AM|#

dhex,

What's to stop your aunt and her partner from performing a ceremony now, clergy and all? Maybe somebody a little more familiar with the law will correct me, but I think they can probably pool their property now on a purely contractual basis. Of course, that still leaves a lot of stuff like joint child custody and exemption from testifying against one another in court. But the proper remedy for the inequity there is to get the State out of the business of licensing and regulating marriages altogether.

joe|10.1.03 @ 10:18AM|#

Any lawyer that told the City Council different would be disbarred for gross malpractice. He's not saying they should get rid of people for political differences, but for upholding the law they swore to uphold. Good lord.

|10.1.03 @ 11:35AM|#

Apparently Stoos has never been to Georgia, because his kind of rabid theocracy is running rampant here in the South.

dhex|10.1.03 @ 12:16PM|#

kevin - they've done all that they can, but new jersey doesn't have the same sort of "domestic partnership" protections that, for example, new york does. thankfully they have no children - that could be a nightmare if something happened to one of them. there are some clever power of attorney games you can play which reinforce a partner's legal status in these cases but it's not all that rock solid.

i guess what confuses/infuriates me is if people are ok with having to go to the state to have something as amorphous as "love" ok'd why they'd care about who else is playing along.

ultimately, i agree with you - i'm getting married in march and having my social life doublechecked and licensed by some governmental office is disgusting - but since most of the country and the world seems to think their bodies, lives, minds, etc are everyone else's fucking business we're stuck with this model until something new replaces it. an event for which i'm not holding my breath, to say the least.

hell, the wife-elect thinks i'm crazy when i get upset about stuff like this. :)