The world is going nuts. I have often felt a bit like Cassandra, but … Cassandra was right.Posted on 03/31/2015 9:18:37 PM PDT by NYer
The world is going nuts. I have often felt a bit like Cassandra, but … Cassandra was right.
Here is another take.
From the pen of John Zmirak at The Stream with my emphases and comments:
The expected Supreme Court decision imposing on 50 states an entirely newunderstanding of marriage, and the frenzy of hatred that gay activists have stoked against Indiana for trying to shelter religious believers from crippling lawsuits should wake us to a cold and stark reality: The age of tolerance in America is vanishing before your eyes. The question is how Christians and other people of faith and good will are going to respond.
Let’s break this down in stark and simple terms: Not only were gay activists willing to overturn an act of Congress (the Defense of Marriage Act) on spurious grounds; they also wish to force their libertine idea of marriage onto voters in each of the 50 states, voiding dozens of laws on an issue that has always rested with the states. [So, it is not just an issue of sodomy. This is a constitutional issue.]
Not satisfied with that, these activists want the full force of the regulatory state to compel every single American to affirm and accept the delusion of same-sex “marriage,” under the same civil and criminal penalties that now forbid discrimination by race. [BUT… the “gay” thing is nothing like the civil rights issues of the 60’s. Comparing the “gay” thing and race is like comparing apples and carrots.] A famous case was a 70-year-old Christian florist who declined to decorate a gay wedding, and was crushed by a successful lawsuit and the full force of the ACLU’s legal team. She was one of the Brave New Law’s first victims. She will be far from the last. [That’s for sure.]
These activists use the power of city governments (as in San Francisco) to try to intimidate isolated Catholic schools into abandoning Christian teaching on sexual ethics. Such zealots corrupt the academic authorities who grant accreditation in order to financially cripple schools such as Gordon College that maintain Christian “morals” clauses as part of their hiring policies.
Those who defend the reality of marriage, including even unbelievers who defend freedom of religion and association, are not simply wrong — they are “bigots” and “haters” who deserve to be fined, boycotted and bankrupted; [Crucifige! Crucifige eum!] to lose their jobs like Brendan Eich, the ex-CEO of Mozilla, and face financial ruin — as Elton John hopes to break Dolce & Gabbana, and [follow the trajectory] as Apple CEO Tim Cook hopes to break the entire State of Indiana. Politicians are joining in, with the Connecticut governor, and Seattle and San Francisco mayors, banning official travel to Indiana. [It goes from bakers and florists, to schools to entire states. What’s next?]
As Austin Ruse points out, states such as Indiana are not giving Christians a pass to broadly discriminate against gays. Such religious freedom laws “deal with the very narrow question of whether vendors can be forced by the state to participate in religious ceremonies that violate their own religious consciences.”
Given the fanatical response to a modest bill virtually identical to a federal law upheld by courts and bills on the books in twenty other states, [QUAERITUR…] how long before the call comes out for the “bigots” to be imprisoned? The First Amendment won’t protect us, if leaders like Hillary Clinton have their way; in public statements she followed President Obama in replacing the Constitution’s “free exercise” with “freedom of worship.”
The implicit message shouldn’t be missed: Say what you want in church for an hour every Sunday, but the rest of the week belongs to us.Your homophobic beliefs deserve no more protection than the religious use of peyote.
Scary.
Get your heads into that mental place where you will be able to face the persecution that is coming. You will be vilified, in especially venomous ways, even within the Church by catholics seeking to twist the Church into an instrument of social re-engineering.
Progressive == Repressive == Oppressive
I understand all that. You’re right.
We laugh at Liberals. They would Imprison us if they could.
And they’d smirk at us as they loaded us into the cattle cars.
But a lot of them would get terminal lead poisoning first.
Well Said
Since it never was, it cannot logically be “over”.
Progressive == Repressive == Oppressive
Right on!
You know they’re besides themselves because most of us are armed.
Adroitly stated.
You’re just saying that because it’s true...
Right on.
Only operative clause of Indiana Law (which was bill SB101):
"no governmental entity may substantially burden a person's exercise of religion"
Exactly what is the LGBT lobby protesting again?
Yup, and I would say we are somewhere in the 900's. Not much left before it will be time for a new game plan.
Yup, and I would say we are somewhere in the 900’s. Not much left before it will be time for a new game plan.
I agree on both points.
We don’t have much blood left.
I am 64 and probably won’t be around in 20 years but am scared to death for my grandchildren.
“Now, since the family and human society at large spring from marriage, these men will on no account allow matrimony to be the subject of the jurisdiction of the Church. Nay, they endeavor to deprive it of all holiness, and so bring it within the contracted sphere of those rights which, having been instituted by man, are ruled and administered by the civil jurisprudence of the community. Wherefore it necessarily follows that they attribute all power over marriage to civil rulers, and allow none whatever to the Church; and, when the Church exercises any such power, they think that she acts either by favor of the civil authority or to its injury. Now is the time, they say, for the heads of the State to vindicate their rights unflinchingly, and to do their best to settle all that relates to marriage according as to them seems good.”
—Pope Leo XIII, 1880
All marriage has ever been to the state in the modern era is simply whatever judges, pols, or the voting majority think it is at any one time.
Freegards
I reject the entire premise that democrats “tolerate” or choose to stomach my free exercise of religion. When I exercise a God-given right it isn't at the sufferance of the Left. I don't care if they don't like it.
We don't need permission or forbearance to exercise religious freedom anymore than to exercise freedom of speech and press.
By acknowledging their premise, that they endure religion even though it p!sses them off, we are setting ourselves up fast for similar treatment of our other rights.
Allowing them the power to tolerate or not religious freedom is to open a door to consideration of tolerating our other rights, like speech and press here at FreeRepublic.
The Left are pros at building on their past outrages. Give them an inch here and they are sure to further assault and shut down the voice of conservatives.
The thing to remember about all these modern “rights” groups is that no matter how much they use the word “equal” they don’t really mean it. They don’t want to be regarded as equal with their supposed oppressors; They want to be regarded as better than their supposed oppressors. They want to be given special treatment in all situations and they want it entered into law that they will be treated with deference from now onward.
Modern radical feminists are actually female supremacists. They believe they are better than men and that men deserve to be punished collectively for their past transgressions against women.
Modern radical gay rights activists are actually homosexual supremacists.They believe they are better than Christians and that Christians deserve to be punished collectively for their past transgressions against homosexuals.
Modern radical [insert minority] activists are actually [insert minority] supremacists. They believe they are better than whites and that whites deserve to be punished collectively for their past transgressions against [insert minority].
Is it time for a skin-head convention in San Francisco to have gay florist and bakers and chefs provide the decor and foods?
If I were in the service business and did not want to provide the service to a customer, bid very high, and if you get the job, cut corners to make sure they did not get their money’s worth.
Payment in advance of course.
For now, for the time being.
Simply to be able to “oppress” others in turn.
Are you sure about that it is a disservice to religious freedom to use the word “tolerant” in that the left use it to frame the debate?
Rather it is a “claim” on the part of the mob to be at 51%. Good for inflating numbers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
