Sean Penn's Attack on Christians Reposted After Censorship

Censorship, Fair Use, and Why the Video Was Removed

I was informed this afternoon by YouTube that one of my videos has been removed from the system. It is the video I put up last week of my response to Sean Penn's anti-Christian diatribe at the Oscars.

Now, of course, the ostensible reason given was copyright violation. We all know, and the folks at YouTube know, that what I did in quoting those few seconds of Penn's comments is called fair use. I cited him and then interacted with his specific comments on an issue that is public in nature and was specifically a rebuke of Christians such as myself.

That is the very classic definition of fair use. You can go on YouTube today, in fact I'm linking over on the right-hand side to at least one version of this very same clip that has been viewed over 600 ,000 times as of the making of this particular video, and I really doubt that any of the, I counted some 48 versions of this on YouTube, that any but a few have the official stamp of approval of the Oscars.

We all know the reason why my video was removed. My video was removed because of what I said. It was a form of censorship based upon liberalism. And the fact that the left cannot allow people to disagree with them.

They cannot win a debate. They cannot win dialogue. They don't want dialogue, they want a monologue. And so to promote their agenda, they have to silence the other side. Shout them down, silence them in whatever ways you wish.

That is what has taken place here. So what I'm going to do is I'm going to take all the comments I made and I'm going to repost them just without the Sean Penn clip. And if that gets deleted, then we'll know the fact that you cannot any longer on YouTube present any other perspective other than that which is the dogmatically accepted one.

It's funny that this kind of thing is happening. I guess it had to wait until people were no longer aware of the past, they could no longer think about past events. How many times have you heard people criticizing Christians because you want to go back to the Inquisition or the Crusades or something as if any Christians want to do that in the first place.

And yet in reality, it's the people on the left who are imitating the worst of the Inquisitors. Those who seek to silence any opposition to the status quo, to the dogmatic definition of the current cultural norms.

That's exactly what we see happening on the left today. That is how secularism deals with those that challenge its central dogmas. And so here are the comments that I made in response to Sean Penn's attack, his deeply bigoted and prejudicial attack upon Christians, just without Sean Penn.

You can go all over YouTube and watch it, you just can't put it all in one place because that would of course violate the leftist ideology of those who engage in censorship. So here are my comments in response to Sean Penn.

Hollywood, Milk, and the Attack on Christian Values

The preceding comments took place as actor Sean Penn received an Academy Award for his work in Milk, a film promoting the homosexual agenda. And of course it is hardly surprising that in the midst of the Academy Awards, where you have this tremendous celebration of Hollywood's detestation of Christianity, detestation of the cultural and ethical foundations upon which this nation was founded, that Mr. Penn would take this opportunity to make these types of comments.

I would simply point out that Hollywood has no basis for making moral or ethical pronouncements. One need only look at the situation in Hollywood these days in regards to illegitimate children, marriages, drug usage, suicide, and things like that, to recognize that Hollywood is the last place that we should be looking for any type of moral guidance.

Hollywood has disqualified itself from being able to make any such pronouncements. And secondly, it is quite obvious that Mr. Penn is making reference to Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church cult out of Kansas.

And once again, as I have said many times in the past, this small little cult is not representative of anything but a small little cult out of Kansas. It's not representative of biblical Christianity, Calvinism, Reformed theology, or anything the like.

It needs to be seen for what it is, a very small group of hate-filled people who pervert the word of God, who are false teachers, and need to be identified as such. They do, of course, present a very useful foil for people like Mr. Penn to take their activities, their perspectives, and just simply expand them out as if they are representative of sound biblical theology and those who believe the Bible to be the word of God.

It is quite true that Fred Phelps and his followers are the greatest friends that Sean Penn and others could ever have, because due to their lack of biblical balance and their simple ignorance, they give reason for blasphemy against the gospel, and they function as they are right now in our society as an example for the liberals of what Christianity is supposed to be all about, and therefore they bring tremendous disregard and disrepute upon the name of Christ.

They need to be recognized for what they are. Thirdly, you heard Mr. Penn completely change the reality of history in regards to the situation in California with Proposition 8. We had a proposition on the ballot in Arizona as well that passed likewise, and yes, I voted for it.

Those of you who are going around intimidating people for their votes, which is a grossly immoral activity. It should be an un-American activity. It should be an activity that brings people into great disrepute.

We should be rebuking all of those who are attacking businesses, attacking individuals for how they voted in a free election, and yet the mainstream media does not even want to talk about these things, and yet this is happening.

People's names are being put out there, and they are being attacked for how they voted on a moral issue in our society. This is the thuggery of the left, and it needs to be identified for what it is. But for those of you who are attacking people, I voted for the definition of marriage here in Arizona, and all of those leftists who are supporters of our ministry—oh, there aren't any anyway, so I guess it really doesn't matter.

Anyway, you'll notice his complete change of history. This was not a ban on same-sex marriage. It was a reaffirmation of the view of marriage that had existed in California from the beginning. It is not even disputable that not a single person who wrote the California state constitution would ever have dreamed of same-sex marriage.

It is indisputable. The founding fathers of the United States did not dream of same-sex marriage. And so what you have is the revolutionary attempt to change the definition of marriage, to reject the Judeo-Christian basis of what marriage is supposed to be that has been a part of this society from its beginning.

This is a revolutionary thing, but they recognize that Americans aren't really into revolution too much, and so they want to try to fly this under a different banner. They want to call it a ban on same-sex marriage.

Well, let's think logically for a moment. If that was the case, then it was also a ban on bestiality. It was a ban on polygamy. It was a ban on marrying your cat or your dog or your children. Is that really what it was?

Given Mr. Penn's very twisted illogic, we would have to say that what it was was a reaffirmation of what had always been the societal norm based upon what I as a Christian believe is God's revelation as to what marriage is, and it will never matter what the secular state says marriage is.

Marriage is defined by God, and I think it needs to be pointed out with clarity and with force that there is a day coming for every single one of us when we will stand before the one who determined and defined marriage, and we will answer for whether we honored his determination of that or whether we perverted it.

The only way to avoid the wrath of that one is to repent of your perversion of his ways now in this life. That has been the message of the Christian people to this nation, well, from before its founding.

Equal Rights, the Lordship of Jesus Christ, and Christian Persecution

Fourthly, he tried to hide the revolutionary rejection of the moral and ethical standards of the nation under the banner of equal rights. I find this to be extremely offensive. I find it to be disgusting and repulsive.

It is offensive to those who have, in fact, striven for equal rights meaningfully in our society. This has nothing to do with equal rights. Everyone has the right to marry. This is an issue of what marriage is.

These people have the bully pulpit. They don't engage in meaningful give and take and debate on these matters. They just either shout you down or they know that they're going to be in situations, as Mr. Penn was, where no one's going to challenge him.

He doesn't have to answer for the irrationalities of his own position and the twisted nature of his reasoning. That is how they get away with this kind of amazing statement. But it needs to be recognized.

It has nothing to do with equal rights at all. It has to do with the definition of marriage. Finally, I would simply say to Mr. Penn himself, upon what basis do you assert that I should reject the Lordship of Jesus Christ, and why do you think you have the right to offend Christians while accepting an Academy Award?

Because that is what you are doing. We need to start making sure people in our society realize that when Mr. Penn and others like him engage in this, they are telling us as Christians that we are to abandon our faith, that we are deeply offended by this, that this is, in essence, persecution of the Christian faith.

We just need to start being very straightforward about this. Upon what basis do you tell me that I should abandon my belief in the Word of God and my acceptance of the Lordship of Jesus Christ? What's your basis for this?

That my grandchildren are going to be ashamed? Mr. Penn stood in front of an audience of people who wildly applauded his words, and in essence said that I should be ashamed to be a Christian. I should be ashamed to hold the same view that Christians have held down through the ages.

If that's not anti-Christian bigotry, what is it? Could someone identify it for me, please? It is anti-Christian bigotry, expressed on national television to the approbation of many. He said that my grandchildren will be ashamed of my position.

That's assuming that my grandchildren likewise will abandon the Christian faith. Evidently, Mr. Penn doesn't like the Christian faith. He doesn't want to see it continue to exist in our society. The only way for this to happen is if my grandchildren repudiate Jesus Christ.

That seems to be what Mr. Penn wants. Is it Mr. Penn's hope that they would do so, that they would abandon biblical Christianity? Evidently it is. Are these not deeply bigoted and hateful words? If these were said, ask a simple question.

Could Mr. Penn say these words to Muslims, Hindus, Jews, Buddhists? Or is it just because it's Christians that it's okay? That seems to be the case in our society today. If in point of fact the topic was what Islam says on this subject, you would not hear Mr. Penn stating the things he did.

You would not hear him expressing a desire that Islam would decrease and would in essence disappear within a generation or two. But that's what Mr. Penn is saying about biblical Christianity. That's the situation we face today in our society.

Justice, Righteousness, and the Gospel of Salvation

And let me make it very, very clear. The reason the Christian can respond with rationality, doesn't have to respond with anger and nastiness, but just simply pointing out the many logical contradictions and the misuse of reasoning that Mr. Penn's brief comments demonstrated.

The reason we can do so is, first of all, we are not given by God the authority to somehow do something about this in this life by force or anger, hatred, or anything like that. God is the one who is the author of justice.

Justice will be done. And there is a day coming when each one of us will stand before our judge. As a Christian, I recognize my sin. I recognize how far short of God's standard I fall. And the only reason that I believe that I will be able to stand before a holy and just God is because I stand clothed in the righteousness of another, in the righteousness of Jesus Christ.

I cling solely to him. Now Mr. Penn does not confess that faith. And so seemingly he believes he can stand before a just and holy God and defend his actions, including his action of perverting the very message of Jesus Christ and the very law of God.

God's wrath will come upon every person who stands before a just and holy God without that perfect righteousness. And in fact, God's wrath will come upon every nation that indulges its sinful desires and chooses to reject God's truth.

Indeed, I believe that Mr. Penn's words are not what will bring wrath. I believe that they are part and parcel of God's wrath. They are an example of how far God has already allowed this society to degenerate in its hatred of its own history, its own foundation.

That truly is an amazing commentary. But the day will come when justice will be done. Every sin will be punished, either in the sinner or in a perfect substitute. And that perfect substitute is Jesus Christ.

The only way of salvation is to turn to him in repentance and faith. That's for everyone, because God has only provided one way of salvation. That he has proven by raising Jesus Christ from the dead. That is the message of the gospel.

Thanks for listening.