Trump Admin Bans African Leader From US Who Announced Opposition To LGBTQ: “I Prefer to Anger Those Countries Than To Anger God”
How can one claim to worship God and yet, promote what God condemns and calls an abomination? Perhaps, someone should ask President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. No, this isn’t the Obama administration anymore, Christian Americans. The Trump administration has banned a top Tanzanian official from entering the US due to his pro-Bible, pro-Christian views on homosexuality.
Keep in mind we are being heavily censored, please follow us on our social media pages: Telegram USA.Life, Gab, Parler, Minds, Spreely, MeWe, Twitter, Facebook
In a statement posted Friday, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo designated Paul Christian Makonda, administrative chief of the capital Dar es Salaam, “as ineligible to enter the U.S. for his involvement in gross violations of [human rights].”
Today we designated Dar es Salaam Regional Commissioner Paul Christian Makonda as ineligible to enter the U.S. for his involvement in gross violations of #humanrights. We are deeply concerned over deteriorating respect for human rights and rule of law in #Tanzania.
— Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) January 31, 2020
Keep in mind, again, this is not the administration of the usurper Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah that is advancing America to war against her greatest enemy: God.
- Judicial Abuse of the 14th Amendment: Abortion, Sexual Orientation & Homosexual “Marriage”
- Trump: I Have No Problem With A Sodomite “Married” To Another Man Running For Office
- US Embassy & George Soros Push Sodomite Pride Parade In 84% Christian Country Of Georgia
- White House Chooses Sodomite Agenda Over Religious Liberty
- Trump lurches left on Abortion, Homosexuality
- Donald Trump Promises “Forward Motion on Equality” for Sodomites – Says Marriage View is “Evolving”
“We are deeply concerned over deteriorating respect for human rights and rule of law in [Tanzania],” he added.
First of all, dealing with those who commit sodomy is not a violation of human rights. In fact, just like there is no God-given right to worship false gods, there is also no right to engage in what the God who gives legitimate rights condemns.
Tanzania holds to what our forefathers held to and that is engaging in homosexual behavior is criminal: crimes against nature and nature’s God.
Furthermore, according to Reporters Without Borders, an international organization advocating freedom of information and freedom of the press, is “deeply concerned” about the freedom of expression in the country, according to Arnaud Froger, head of the group’s Africa chapter. And Neela Ghoshal, senior LGBT rights researcher at Human Rights Watch, said Tanzanian authorities “have orchestrated a systematic attack” on LGBTQ people.
In 2018, Makonda, for his part, announced the creation of an anti-gay surveillance squad and urged residents to spy on their neighbors, asking them to report any homosexuals via a phone hotline, NPR reported.
“Report them to me,” he said during a televised address.
The BBC reported that Makonda anticipated facing international backlash for the move, but said, “I prefer to anger those countries than to anger God.”
“As we take this stand, do not tell us about human rights,” he explained further. “There is no right to go against creation written on any religious books. Keep your laws. Being gay is not allowed here in Dar es Salaam.”
Now, this is a man with courage and conviction, not a double talked like many of American politicians and bureaucrats.
As for State Secretary Pompeo, whom I warned you could not trust when he was appointed and this guy claims to be a Christian, he issued a statement.
Here’s the full text (emphasis mine):
The Department of State is publicly designating Paul Christian Makonda under Section 7031(c) of the FY 2020 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act due to his involvement in gross violations of human rights, which include the flagrant denial of the right to life, liberty, or the security of persons. Specifically, the Department has credible information that Makonda was involved in such violations in his capacity as the Regional Commissioner of Dar es Salaam. In that role, he has also been implicated in oppression of the political opposition, crackdowns on freedom of expression and association, and the targeting of marginalized individuals.
The United States remains deeply concerned over deteriorating respect for human rights and rule of law in Tanzania. This includes actions taken by the government that curtail freedom of expression, freedom of association, and right of peaceful assembly; target marginalized people and the political opposition; and jeopardize life.
Section 7031(c) provides that, in cases where the Secretary of State has credible information that foreign officials have been involved in significant corruption or a gross violation of human rights, those individuals and their immediate family members are ineligible for entry into the United States. The law also requires the Secretary of State to publicly or privately designate such officials and their immediate family members. In addition to the public designation of Paul Christian Makonda, the Department is also publicly designating his spouse, Mary Felix Massenge.
These actions against Paul Christian Makonda underscore our concern with human rights violations and abuses in Tanzania, as well as our support for accountability for those who engage in such violations and abuses. We call on the Tanzanian government to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of expression, association, and the right of peaceful assembly.
The Trump administration is sorely misguided on this issue and needs a return to the actual rule of law. Both Trump and Pompeo have shown complete disregard for biblical law, as well as the Constitution on many occasions.
After all, President Trump has even said he doesn’t have a problem with a sodomite “married” to another sodomite running for the White House and considers it “fine,” but God certainly does not.
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. -Leviticus 20:13
They would do well to listen to William Blackstone:
“No enactment of man can be considered law unless it conforms to the law of God.”
Right smack dab in the middle at number 26 is this:
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”
There is nothing “normal, natural or healthy” about sodomy. It is unnatural, not normal and unhealthy. It’s even shameful to imagine what these men do with their privates and their orifices, especially the one designed to emit human waste.
Our forefathers understood this well.
In quoting what I had previously written concerning how our founding fathers and the states previously dealt with sodomy, according to the actual rule of law, I wrote:
First, note that our founding fathers would have been outraged that sodomites would be out in the open. They knew that such perversion would both undermine and erode the moral foundations of civilization. Under the British common law, the term sodomy was used to identify same-sex relations and was a capital crime. Understand that the founders referenced Sir William Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England extensively. He was a British attorney, jurist, law professor, author, and political philosopher.
Blackstone’s commentaries were the premiere legal source used by the Founding Fathers in America. So this should carry some weight with those who claim they know what the Founding Fathers knew and wanted concerning the issue of sodomy, but I’m guessing they will dismiss it. In Blackstone’s Book the Fourth of Public Wrongs: Of Offences against the Persons of Individuals, Chapter Fifteen, he writes the following on pages 215-216 (emphasis added):
IV. WHAT has been here observed…, which ought to be the more clear in proportion as the crime is the more detestable, may be applied to another offence, of a still deeper malignity; the infamous crime against nature, committed either with man or beast…. But it is an offence of so dark a nature…that the accusation should be clearly made out….
I WILL not act so disagreeable part, to my readers as well as myself, as to dwell any longer upon a subject, the very mention of which is a disgrace to human nature. It will be more eligible to imitate in this respect the delicacy of our English law, which treats it, in it’s very indictments, as a crime not fit to be named; peccatum illud horribile, inter chriftianos non nominandum [“that horrible sin not to be named among Christians”—DM]. A taciturnity observed likewise by the edict of Constantius and Constans: ubi fcelus eft id, quod non proficit fcire, jubemus infurgere leges, armari jura gladio ultore, ut exquifitis poenis fubdantur infames, qui funt, vel qui futuri funt, rei [“When that crime is found, which is not profitable to know, we order the law to bring forth, to provide justice by force of arms with an avenging sword, that the infamous men be subjected to the due punishment, those who are found, or those who future will be found, in the deed”—DM]. Which leads me to add a word concerning its punishment.
THIS the voice of nature and of reason, and the express law of God, determine to be capital. Of which we have a signal instance, long before the Jewish dispensation, by the destruction of two cities by fire from heaven: so that this is an universal, not merely a provincial, precept. And our ancient law in some degree imitated this punishment, by commanding such miscreants to be burnt to death; though Fleta
says they should be buried alive: either of which punishments was indifferently used for this crime among the ancient Goths. But now the general punishment of all felonies is the fame, namely, by hanging: and this offence (being in the times of popery only subject to ecclesiastical censures) was made single felony by the statute 25 Hen. VIII. c. 6. and felony without benefit of clergy by statute 5 Eliz. c. 17. And the rule of law herein is, that, if both are arrived at years of discretion, agentes et confentientes pari poena plectantur.
Most Americans are completely unaware that the “Father of our country,” George Washington, who would also be considered this country’s first “Commander-in-Chief” approved the dismissal from the service at Valley Forge in 1778 of Lt. Frederick Gotthold Enslin. Why did he do this? According to the orders, which are held at the Library of Congress, Enslin was “attempting to commit sodomy” with another soldier. Under the title of “Head Quarters, V. Forge, Saturday, March 14, 1778” there is the following entry:
At a General Court Martial whereof Colo. Tupper was President (10th March 1778) Lieutt. Enslin of Colo. Malcom’s Regiment tried for attempting to commit sodomy, with John Monhort a soldier; Secondly, For Perjury in swearing to false Accounts, found guilty of the charges exhibited against him, being breaches of 5th. Article 18th. Section of the Articles of War and do sentence him to be dismiss’d the service with Infamy. His Excellency the Commander in Chief approves the sentence and with Abhorrence and Detestation of such Infamous Crimes orders Lieutt. Enslin to be drummed out of Camp tomorrow morning by all the Drummers and Fifers in the Army never to return; The Drummers and Fifers to attend on the Grand Parade at Guard mounting for that Purpose.
What’s even more interesting is that Enslin’s dismissal came less than two weeks after another soldier, Ensign Anthony Maxwell, was acquitted of the charge of “propagating a scandalous report prejudicial to the character of Lieutt. Enslin” on Feb. 27, 1778. Penny Star cites the transcription of the court martial dated March 3, 1778: “At a Brigade Court Martial whereof Colo. Burr was President (Feby. 27th. 1778,) Ensign Maxwell of Colo. Malcom’s Regiment tried for propagating a scandalous report prejudicial to the character of Lieutt. Enslin. The Court after maturely deliberating upon the Evidence produced could not find that Ensign Maxwell had published any report prejudicial to the Character of Lieutt. Enslin further than the strict line of his duty required and do therefore acquit him of the Charge.”
Note that our first President viewed “sodomy” or homosexual relations with “Abhorrence and Detestation.” He was not a spineless, wishy washy, panty waisted man like the current occupant of the White House, who claims his views have “evolved.” He was a man that recognized perverse behavior for what it was, perversion. He was not alone either. In all thirteen colonies, sodomy was treated as a criminal offense and eventually that grew to encompass each and every one of the fifty states. By the way, that fell under “equal treatment under the law.”
The law was based upon Leviticus 20:13:
“If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death.”
This verse was “adopted into legislation and enforced by the colonies of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Connecticut.” Oh the irony that 2012’s GOP Mormon nominee for President Mitt Romney was the one to “legalize” homosexual “marriage” in Massachusetts. Here are just a few of the states and the punishments they executed for sodomy.
That the detestable and abominable vice of buggery [sodomy] . . . shall be from henceforth adjudged felony . . . and that every person being thereof convicted by verdict, confession, or outlawry [unlawful flight to avoid prosecution], shall be hanged by the neck until he or she shall be dead. NEW YORK
That if any man shall lie with mankind as he lieth with womankind, both of them have committed abomination; they both shall be put to death. CONNECTICUT
Sodomy . . . shall be punished by imprisonment at hard labour in the penitentiary during the natural life or lives of the person or persons convicted of th[is] detestable crime. GEORGIA
That if any man shall commit the crime against nature with a man or male child . . . every such offender, being duly convicted thereof in the Supreme Judicial Court, shall be punished by solitary imprisonment for such term not exceeding one year and by confinement afterwards to hard labor for such term not exceeding ten years. MAINE
That if any person or persons shall commit sodomy . . . he or they so offending or committing any of the said crimes within this province, their counsellors, aiders, comforters, and abettors, being convicted thereof as above said, shall suffer as felons. 13 [And] shall forfeit to the Commonwealth all and singular the lands and tenements, goods and chattels, whereof he or she was seized or possessed at the time . . . at the discretion of the court passing the sentence, not exceeding ten years, in the public gaol or house of correction of the county or city in which the offence shall have been committed and be kept at such labor. PENNSYLVANIA
[T]he detestable and abominable vice of buggery [sodomy] . . . be from henceforth adjudged felony . . . and that the offenders being hereof convicted by verdict, confession, or outlawry [unlawful flight to avoid prosecution], shall suffer such pains of death and losses and penalties of their goods. SOUTH CAROLINA
That if any man lieth with mankind as he lieth with a woman, they both shall suffer death. VERMONT
Ah, but some will say, “Thomas Jefferson would have never stood for this. He wanted liberty and equal rights for homosexuals to get married.” Not according to the record he didn’t. In Notes on the State of Virginia by Matthew Carey (1794) Jefferson indicated that in his home state of Virginia, “dismemberment” of the offensive organ was the penalty for sodomy. I’m guessing there weren’t too many sodomites wanting that to take place. You might say that is Jefferson’s home state, but not Jefferson’s thoughts on the issue. Not so fast. Jefferson actually authored a bill penalizing sodomy by castration (The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Andrew A. Lipscomb, editor (Washington, D. C.: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1904), Vol. I, pp. 226-227, from Jefferson’s “For Proportioning Crimes and Punishments)).
I would have to ask President Trump and State Secretary Mike Pompeo if they would ban George Washington, Thomas Jefferson or a host of our forefathers from the US? Based on their antichrist-style stand, I would say they would.
President Trump is not only in serious need to ask forgiveness for this but also repent of promoting such behavior, as is Secretary Pompeo.
Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media