Really? There’s a right to free birth control through your employer? Liar.

But what Moore is doing here is what Obama and his media minions are doing. They’re turning a government mandate that violates the First Amendment into a “rights” issue.

What Obama is attempting to do to the Catholic Church is no different than creating a federal mandate that would require every Islamic-run business to provide pork rinds in their vending machines — because people have a right to equal access to fat free foods.

—-

Note all the Catholic Church-bashing Moore’s engages in. Where is that coming from and what does it have to do with this debate?

It’s just hate, pure and simple.

“The decision to end the show now, or ever, is a painful one, as it risks putting asunder hundreds of close friendships that have developed over the last eight years,” said executive producers David Shore, Katie Jacobs and Hugh Laurie, “but also because the show itself has been a source of great pride to everyone involved.

The producers have always imagined House as an enigmatic creature;  he should never be the last one to leave the party.  How much better to disappear before the music stops, while there is still some promise and mystique in the air.”

Now’s as good a time as any for a post-mortem on one of the quirkiest, most interesting character shows of the last decade. “House’s” focus on a thoroughly unlikeable character was risky, and it paid off; the creators’ decision to make him a thoroughgoing atheist constantly at conflict with others subtly made the case for the bankruptcy of his ideology.  Or, at the very least, it offered philosophical contrast.

Most famously, “House” featured a very pro-life episode in 2007, “Fetal Position,” in which an unborn child reached out of the womb and touched House’s hand, mirroring the famous photograph. That was mirrored by a pro-choice episode that same season that made the case for abortion for a religious rape victim. That was House’s style.

When I interviewed Shore for my latest book, Primetime Propaganda, here’s what he told me about the abortion episodes: “As you can imagine, we’re in Hollywood, we’ve got our share of rabid left wing Democrats here. And … our writing staff has the makeup you’d basically expect of a Hollywood writing staff, and I remember when we were doing ‘Fetal Position,’ there is that image of that little finger of the fetus clasping Dr. House’s hand. And it was a powerful image. And we recognized at the time that’s going to go up on billboards and websites for pro-life organizations. But it was true, and it was accurate, and it was real. And the last thing I want to do is, I happen to be pro-choice, but the last thing I want to do is to give false information or convince people of my argument. I think that’s just not the way to approach things. It’s a difficult choice, and it is a difficult issue.  And I think treating it as anything different than that is dishonest and ultimately counterproductive.”

Shore’s honesty on politics meant that he admitted there was bias against conservatives in Hollywood. As he told me, “there is an assumption in this town that everybody is on the left side of the spectrum, and that the few people on the right, I think people look at them somewhat aghast, and I’m sure it doesn’t help them.” Those are the words of a truth teller. And in its own way, when it wasn’t burdened down with the typical hallmarks of leftist Hollywood (hot bisexuals, open marriages, and the like), “House” was a uniquely truth-telling show.

The Hollywood Reporter:

The Movieguide report rates movies using more than two dozen criteria, such as whether a title promotes capitalism or socialism or if it promotes or denigrates biblical principles. Violence, sex, political correctness, revisionist history, environmentalism, feminism, homosexuality and more hot-button political issues all are taken into consideration.

This year’s report concludes that seven of the top 10 films of 2011 scored high on Movieguide’s index and therefore qualify as films with “strong or very strong Christian, biblical, moral and redemptive content.”

Movieguide identified 91 movies in 2011 that scored high in “conservative/moral categories”; these earned an average of $59 million apiece. On the other hand, it identified 105 movies that scored high in “liberal/leftist categories”; each of those titles earned an average of just $11 million.

The average movie scoring four stars from Movieguide earned $53.5 million while the ones that scored just one star earned $10.6 million.

Exceptions abound, of course, notable ones being The Hangover Part II and The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1, hit movies that earned $581 million and $702 million worldwide, respectively, but are panned by Movieguide as films that promote “fringe worldviews” and “obscene behavior.”

—–

—–

Ellen Barkin, Roseanne Barr, John Legend, Lance Armstrong, and many others have pledged to not only end their support of Komen, they are also urging others to do the same. But that’s how the left thinks. First off, how dare a private charity make a private decision (so much for “choice”). Secondly, you can’t support both for heaven’s sake, Harvey might not invite you to his next shindig.

And yet it is possible to support Komen AND Planned Parenthood, but these sanctimonious celebs are choosing to turn their backs on the fight against breast cancer just to prove to the rest of Hollywood they are good little left-wing minions.

Of all the things for the Hollywood left to put their energy, riches, and celebrity behind, they choose an abortion factory that targets the poor, specifically blacks and Hispanics.

Where are their priorities? Isn’t there a cop killer on death row somewhere in need of support? A child rapist? What’s the matter with these people.

Anyway, good for Ms. Heaton. Not only are her beliefs properly aligned but she’s willing to publicly stand up for them.

Hollywood conservatives are the new Hollywood iconoclasts.

The rest are the Borg, The Man, the minions, The Establishment.

Fortunately, the car bomb did not detonate.

The terrorist turned out to be Faisal Shahzad, a Pakistan-born U.S. citizen. And, not surprisingly, Shahzad wasn’t upset about the health care bill. After pleading guilty in court he said, “I consider myself a Mujahid, a Muslim-soldier.” He was upset, as he put it, over “American occupation of Muslim Lands.”

Shortly after the attack, Bloomberg prematurely asserted that there was no evidence suggesting the bomber was part of any recognized terror network. Shahzad later told the court he trained with the Pakistani Taliban to learn bomb-making and other related skills.

Could it be that Bloomberg has underestimated the threat of Islamist terror, or is there another agenda?

The issue has again become relevant in recent days. The New York Times ran a series of articles and editorials blaming the NYPD for using the film The Third Jihad: Radical Islam’s Vision for America as part of their counter-terrorism training.

The articles calling the film “a Dark Film on U.S. Muslims” and a “Hateful Film” are riddled with inaccuracies and omissions.

Following publication of the articles, Mayor Bloomberg stated that NYPD used “terrible judgment” in showing the film, despite admitting that he had never seen it.

We were not aware that the NYPD was using the film, but when we learned of it some months ago, we were pleased that the officers would have an opportunity to learn about the indoctrination taking place in certain segments of Muslim society in America. The film reveals what viewers are unlikely to see on the evening news: What terrorists, radical preachers and Islamists are saying in their own words, in their own mosques and media, to their followers.

The film exposes how radicals employ the dual strategies of “violent Jihad,” along with a “cultural Jihad,” through which Islamist groups use coercion and non-violent means to gradually expand their influence over Western society.

Now, Mayor Bloomberg, The New York Times and others want to bar law enforcement officers from seeing the film. The question is, why?

We reject, outright, the charge that our film is anti-Muslim or that it casts a shadow over the entire Muslim community. In fact, we go to great lengths throughout the film to differentiate the radical Islamists from peaceful Muslims. The film is narrated by, Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, a devout Muslim-American, who has dedicated his life to exposing the threat of radical Islam.

Our critics have failed to mention these points and have chosen not to challenge the film on the merits of its thesis or content.

Perhaps the reason Mayor Bloomberg wants The Third Jihad banned is the same reason he insinuated the Times Square bomber was a health care terrorist — namely, CAIR.

CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) is one of many Muslim interest groups that purport to represent the Islamic community in America but in reality have well established ties to Hamas and other terror groups.

CAIR was designated by the U.S. Justice Department for its role in terror financing during the nation’s largest-ever trial on the subject. As a result, the FBI has officially severed all ties with the “advocacy organization.”

Outside of its support for terror organizations, CAIR works to quickly and effectively to silence any discussions about radical Islam by playing the racism card and accusing critics of Islamophobia. CAIR’s devices are effective.

As soon as the current story broke, CAIR immediately branded the film “anti-Muslim propaganda” in a press release. This was followed by a CAIR-led protest on the steps of City Hall calling for the resignation of the NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly.

The entire episode could have been a chapter in The Third Jihad. We are now seeing “cultural Jihad” in action. In order to avoid agitating Muslim constituents, Mayor Bloomberg  and Commissioner Kelly are backing away from the film, regardless of its merits.

The net result is that CAIR, a designated Muslim interest group with ties to terror financing, is now telling the NYPD how it should go about fighting terror. If that’s not the ultimate act of subversion, I don’t know what is.

With that said, it was after the Jesus Movement of the ’60s and ’70s, during the 1980’s that many non-denominational churches sprouted up all over America, some of them overseen by self-appointed pastors and leaders who were unaccountable to anyone but themselves. As a result, in the Christian community, young adults, desirous to serve God, were drawn into congregations with showbiz-style charismatic leaders who exploited the enthusiasm and commitment of individuals who, at that time, were too immature to differentiate the counterfeit from the divine.

Kids “raised” in many of these churches responded harshly to hype and unbiblical legalism and emerged from the experience tattooed, smoking, drinking, and toting around babies born out of wedlock. Lost between redemption and confusion were grossly cynical parents who realized they wasted precious years serving man and not God and a generation of kids who sang with Psalty, then grew up eager to partake of forbidden fruit.

Similar scenarios were common in churches across America and could explain the disturbing phenomenon presently on display where the worldly success Christian pop stars achieve is often accompanied by a public fall from grace. Two of the most obvious examples of church kid tragedy include the sorry lives of Jessica and Ashlee Simpson and train-wreck-waiting-to-happen Katy Perry.

In Jessica and Ashlee Simpson’s case, they are the daughters of a former minister-turned-showbiz-pimp named Joe Simpson. Mr. Simpson began as a youth pastor at Heights Baptist Church in Richardson, Texas and, if one were to guess, probably aspired to heights at “Heights” higher than the youth ministry.

It’s probable some kind of disappointment caused Joe to drop the Bible, change from preacher to manager, and work toward elevating his singing daughter from the choir to reality TV. Problem is, ever since Joe made Jessica’s stardom his religion, nothing but disaster has followed the girl. Jessica ’s foray into the world of Hollywood notoriety may have made her a superstar/business mogul, but with success has come irreparable pain and humiliation.

Jessica Simpson’s climb to fame began when she revealed herself to be a bubble-headed ditz after mistaking tuna fish for chicken and ended soon after when she divorced wholesome, nice guy Nick Lachey. The star-studded Simpson divorce list also includes another failed marriage for younger sister/pop star Ashlee, whose marriage to Pete Wentz produced one son named Bronx Mowgli.

After her divorce from Lachey, Jessica Simpson’s romantic life read like a who’s who of unattached men.  The list included such notables as: Maroon Five’s Adam Levine, comedian Dane Cook, and blabbermouth pop star John Mayer, who described Jessica this way: “That girl was like crack cocaine to me… Sexually, it was crazy. That’s all I’ll say. It was like napalm, sexual napalm.”

Then there was football star Tony Romo, Smashing Pumpkins singer Billy Corgan, and her latest, Eric Johnson, father to Joe Simpson’s unborn grandchild.

And let’s not forget Jessica’s breakout movie role in which she soaped up a Dodge Charger dressed in a pink bikini, as Daisy Duke in butt-exposing hot pants in the remake of “The Dukes of Hazzard.”

So while church life and church people are imperfect, the answer was certainly not for Joe Simpson to replace the flawed outworking of Christianity with dysfunction, promiscuity, divorce, and public ridicule which, in Jessica and Ashlee’s case, came disguised as fame and fortune. One can’t help but wonder: if and when Pastor Joe contemplates the cost of celebrity, is he proud?  Has it been worth it?

Either way, besides the Simpson sisters, in the church-kid arena, there’s also alleged teen father Justin Bieber, raunchy Tweeter Natasha Bedingfield, and bawdy Southern Baptist girl Britney Spears. Yet not one of them surpass the biggest disaster in the PK (pastor’s kid) department, former Christian singer turned flamboyant superstar, the shameless self-promoter Katy Perry.

Unlike Joe Simpson, Katheryn Elizabeth Hudson’s father Keith would probably prefer that his pop-icon daughter not profit by gaining the world and losing her soul. However, hugely successful for all the wrong reasons and based on some of her blasphemous comments, outspoken jester Katy might disagree.

Cartoon Katy is indeed the consummate reactionary Christian school and camp/singing in church/no-TV-or-dancing kid. Katy rebelled by remaking herself into a gay activist/slutty pinup girl.  She sings songs like “Ur So Gay,” married ex-heroin and sex addict/comedian/Hare Krishna/80-women-a-month Russell Brand, and filed for divorce after just one year.

In her Rolling Stone magazine interview entitled “Sex, God & Katy Perry: The Hard Road and Hot Times of a Fallen Angel,” Katheryn Hudson said, “When I was a kid, I asked questions about my faith. Now I’m asking questions about the world.”

Hopefully, when the applause of the world Katy Perry is asking questions about stops – which it will – the klieg lights cease to reflect off her electric blue wig, and the cupcake bra is hung out to dry, Ms. Katy will stop singing “I Kissed a Girl” long enough to embrace the essence of truth she was raised to accept but thus far chooses to reject.

And rather than becoming another casualty of an imperfect church filled with imperfect people, perhaps Katheryn will one day have an opportunity to teach Pastor Joe Simpson a thing or two about grace, redemption, and what the God he purported to once believe in considers the true measure of success.

I’ve been looking around for answers, but all I hear is noise. Everyone is pointing fingers at the Left or the Right, blaming Hollywood or Capitol Hill. Time is flying by too quickly for petty arguments. My children’s future won’t wait. I’ve got to do something now.

Here’s my hunch: Could it be that we have simply forgotten what made us such a great nation in the first place? So many people are waiting around for our leaders to come up with a grand plan to save our nation. But is that really how America got started? What if things actually work the other way around? What if real change doesn’t start at the top but at the bottom? What if the best place to begin transforming our country is not the Oval Office but the dinner table?

For the past year and a half, I’ve been making a film called “Monumental,” and I am thrilled to announce that it’s coming to theaters on March 27. We are creating a live, one-night national event in 500 theaters where audiences can experience a monumental moment together. Then we will release the film in theaters in select cities, while providing helpful new resources to families, churches, and schools who want to go further with what they’ve experienced in the film. 

In the film I retrace the footsteps of our Founders from England to America in the hope of discovering our true “national treasure.” I wanted to listen to them, to learn from them. Our forefathers knew we were a forgetful people, that someday we would lose our way as a nation. So they left us “maps” that would guide us back to the source of America’s success. What I discovered is amazing! This is one of the most important journeys of my life. America is worth fighting for, and so are our families. We can still be a “city upon a hill,” but we need to work together. With God’s help, we can turn this thing around. It’s been said, “Footprints in history are not made sitting down,” and I couldn’t agree more. I hope that our children will mark this moment as the turning point when we stood up, came together, and reclaimed the true national treasure of America.

Thus, it’s with pleasure that Big Hollywood presents this exclusive clip from “Courageous,” the latest film by director Alex Kendrick, available now on DVD and Blu-ray. Have a look at some of the bloopers, flubs, and just plain fun had on set during the film’s lighter moments:

“Courageous” is available at Amazon.com.

The son is Tommy Conlon (Tom Hardy), a former Marine just home from Iraq, who didn’t drop by after fourteen years to see how dear dad was doing,. He’s here to hurt the old man in every way possible without laying a hand on him. Tommy expected to find a drunk, and Paddy’s sobriety only angers him more. Dad doesn’t deserve forgiveness, Christ’s or anyone else’s. Tommy is a seething young man made dysfunctional by the baggage he carries around like the bulk of his muscle — an unreachable force of anger and bitter resentment that extends to his older brother Brendan, as well.

Brendan didn’t run away from his father like Tommy and his mother. He was older, had a girlfriend, and had already planted the seeds of a life. Eventually, he married that girl, went to college, became a teacher, had kids, and bought a house. Though they’re very different in so many ways, Tommy and Brendan do at least have one thing in common. No matter how many days sober, they will never forgive their father.

Paddy is a former martial-arts trainer, and this experience is the only thing these three still have in common. For reasons I won’t spoil, Tommy needs to make some quick cash, and that means getting back into the octagon and the competitive world of mixed-martial arts. The same goes for Brendan (a former UFC contender) who refuses to accept charity or file a bankruptcy to save his family from financial ruin. “I don’t do things that way,” he tells a banker, and though he’s a little long in the tooth, into the octagon he goes looking for whatever prize money he can scrape up.

A number of those matches occur in sleazy strip bars, something the school administration doesn’t look kindly on. This leaves Brendan no choice but to fight full-time, and a winner-take-all $5 million championship is something that catches the eye of both brothers. Because Tommy asked Paddy to train him, this means that all three men will fight for more than prize money. The conflict they’ve been running  from is now inevitable, and the fight will be between their shared demons for a resolution to the pain they’ve shared and inflicted on one another.

“Warrior” is one of the best films of the decade and one of the most moving stories I’ve seen in years. O’Connor directs a brilliant performance out of all three of his leads and never allows melodrama to rear its head. Nolte’s performance is especially impressive. We’re meeting a genuinely good man living with unimaginable regret, a Dr. Jekyll burdened by his monstrous behavior towards his wife and sons as Dr. Hyde. Everything comes from Nolte’s haunted eyes. This is the most restrained performance of his career and most certainly an Oscar-caliber performance.

“Warrior” is also a rare opportunity these days to see men act like men on the big screen. These are men doing what a man’s gotta do to right wrongs and meet their responsibilities. These are men of action, not talk, men with pride and honor and a sense of duty. They’re not perfect men, far from it, but they’re striving to be good men the only way they know how. This is also the rare Hollywood picture that treats the working class, our military, and the Christian faith with respect.

This is a film about big things, and I don’t mean the brutal world of mixed martial-arts. Like the very best sports films, the sport itself is nothing more than a vehicle to explore characters, their relationships, and a theme. “Warrior’s” theme is the most powerful element of the film, a living, breathing thing that grabs hold of your insides and tightens its hold as the story passes by. It’s not about who wins the tournament or even if Brendan can keep his house.

It’s about forgiveness.

“Warrior” is available at Amazon.com.

—–

Mark Wahlberg is a Roman Catholic who goes to church every day to pray to be a better servant of God, a better man.

Refreshing, to say the least.