Tag Archives: gay marriage

Mar 2 2015

The Last Stand: The Shoe

 

“If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on earth.” -Ronald Reagan

The events and circumstances surrounding Barronelle Stutzman have brought into stark clarity the motives and designs of the gay marriage movement here in the United States. It is has never been about marriage equality as some have claimed, but it is about the targeting and removal of all influence and participation by Christians in our society today. Recent polls have show a precipitous drop in support for gay marriage as citizens with opinions on both sides of the debate have been appalled to see the blatant religious persecution of Christians by homosexuals in our Nation. What was once thought the unthinkable has become reality in the United States.

Even as buyer’s remorse has begun to set in for some of the proponents of gay marriage, the die has been cast as the political establishment has gleefully taken up the charge. Christianity with its teachings of moral virtue, demands of purity, and calls to fidelity have long been viewed as an encumbrance to government by the politically elite and scorned and despised by their media allies. Now emboldened by what they perceive as a populace surge of animosity towards Christianity, governmental institutions have handed a regulatory bludgeon to homosexual activists, encouraging them to target their “enemy”, and target them they have.

The crusade against Christianity has swept across the Nation isolating every man, woman, and child who dare to holds opinions that differ with homosexuals. These are hauled into court, their businesses taken away, homes and finances confiscated, sent off to reeducation classes, children are mocked and humiliated in school, and parents threatened to have their children taken away if they don’t recant their beliefs. Why? Their beliefs are unacceptable to the government.

But what of the 1st Amendment, you ask? Was this Amendment put in place only to protect the views and beliefs of those who are in vogue and popular? Why would there need to be an amendment to protect the speech of those the populace and government found acceptable? In contrast, wouldn’t the purpose our Founders foresaw be to protect unpopular speech, beliefs, ideas, dissidents, revolutionaries, unpopular religions, and the intolerant under the 1st Amendment? The 1st Amendment doesn’t protect your right to be nice and accepted. It protects your right to rattle somebody’s cage.

So, how does a minority group of about 1% of the populace receive the power to persecute Christians, who still make up a majority in this Nation? The bane of society today is political appeasement. Not all in the political class are looking for an opportunity to attack Christians; in fact, a majority probably does not. They just lack the intestinal fortitude to do what our Founding Fathers did in the Constitution and Bill of Rights: Say no!

Decisions of law and governance are no longer legislated with a view of its effect upon the Constitution, but rather, the effect upon the emotions and comfort of the aggrieved, unless, of course, you’re a Christian. The government thinks popular opinion views Christians as a punching bag, and why not? The Nightly News tells them so. Punch away!

Government is always playing catch-up. In an effort to be “cool”, politicos always govern based on what polls dictate. By the time the laws engage, the populace opinion has changed and government must oppress in order to enforce its new laws. Governing by popularity is like that hapless friend who is always showing up to the party wearing the “latest” style only to painfully realize that style changed in the last 48 hrs. They never realize that a blue jeans and t-shirt approach can weather every changing fad.

Now as the persecutions increase, Americans are getting that sinking feeling they’ve been duped. Those that are old enough to remember a time when history was taught in schools see the ominous shadow of totalitarianism rising from the mist of tolerance. What if my beliefs are suddenly deemed intolerant by the government? That hollow thud of realization you feel in the pit of your stomach might be the sound of the other shoe dropping.

Feb 23 2015

The Last Stand: The Bait

“If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on earth.” This simple but poignant quote from Ronald Reagan was never more appropriate than the day and age in which we live today. Much of the liberties we have enjoyed in our past now stand alone on the precipice, teetering on the jagged edge of the deep chasm of tyranny.

It is no secret that in some corners of our society the well of tolerance towards those of Christian faith has dwindled to a small stagnant puddle or a dusty dry cistern. The teachings of love, salvation, redemption, yes, that arcane Pilgrim’s Progress towards that Celestial City, are viewed with a thinly veiled contempt or the open disdain that moral virtue is the scourge of civilization and must be removed. The American Christian now finds himself walking through the gilded streets of Bunyan’s Vanity Fair.

If Christians could just dispense with the profession of their faith and betray their convictions there would be no trouble, for this is what political and societal elites are demanding. What seems logical to the self-preservationist is unfathomable to a person of faith. This is the crux of the issue, faith, a belief in something bigger than themselves with vows and allegiances they cannot compromise; therefore, an easy target.

With a humanistic snort of disgust, the elitist feels compelled to remove or reeducate the weak-minded who cling to their obstructive convictions. Obstructive to whom and who are really the weak-minded? When did we become a Nation of such squeamish constitution and so flimsy a skeletal structure that a mere differing belief, disproval or even rebuke of ones actions somehow decimates a person’s freedom and the offender must be punished with the whole weight of the bludgeon of government?

The cry and the hue of late seems to that of liberty, yet the cry of liberty for some has been modernized to say, “Give me liberty and give them death!” Any that hold to the belief of moral absolutes are targeted for removal from influence in society. The “weakness” of conviction must bow to the “strength” of relativism; it’s the natural selection of civilization.

So just as the political rivals of the Hebrew Daniel convinced the King of Babylon to outlaw prayer knowing full well Daniel would not compromise his convictions, the trap has been set for Christians here in the United States. The traditions of procreation, marriage, are sacred within Christianity, as Christians are given a Biblical command to “raise up a Godly seed” and pass on the principles of Christ to each generation. These sacred traditions are now the bait to justify the persecution of Christians in this Country.

A recent political cartoon I happened across mocked the hypocrisy of relativism that is so prevalent in our society today. Two individuals are remarking over recent news. One tells the other that first, a hotel is refusing to have Bibles in its rooms, secondly, a mall is banning prayer, and thirdly, conservatives are complaining that Facebook is screening and blocking posts, all to which the other individual responds that these are a private businesses. It is their right.

When the first individual observes that several businesses have refused to participate in gay-marriages because of their religious beliefs, the other individual is furious and demands that the government punish these businesses. This would be humorous if not for the consequences of the hard irony. Again we have selective liberty, with just Christians targeted for denial of basic liberties and removal from the workplace of society.

Ask Barronelle Stutzman a Washington State florist, who had served a male customer, knowing he was gay, for years without discrimination. When he decided to have a gay marriage, Stutzman declined to do his floral arrangements on the basis of her beliefs, and instead referred him to another florist. This other florist provided the flowers to the man, and other florists even offered free flowers. Still the 72-year-old grandmother was sued, the Washington Courts have taken away her business, and ruled that all her personal belongings are now subject to suit…. because of her beliefs. She was targeted.

Whether you believe in the value of marriage or not, you should believe in the value of freedom. The political disposition of today despises the tenants of faith. Yes, although the tradition of heterosexual marriage is not exclusive to Christianity, Christians hold marriage as one of the fundamental rites that bind the foundation of their faith. While some will find smug satisfaction in the persecutions of Christians and their unshakable convictions, be wary that the bludgeon does not swing both ways.

As we trudge down this tired and over trodden road towards the doom of repeated history, ask yourself this: If a government can target a private business based on the religious beliefs of the proprietor, what is to keep it from targeting others for new things it deems intolerant? Beware of the other shoe! It just might drop. When we allow fools to march in and take away the decency and civility that was once the hallmark of our civilization, we have doomed liberty to die here in her last stand.

Updated:  Barronelle Stutzman has been offered a settlement by the State of Washington’s  Attorney General.  Stutzman would only have to pay a $2000.00 dollar fine and  one dollar in legal fees, but she must agree to contribute her services to gay marriages and dispense with her beliefs.  The 72 year old florist has written a letter to reject the A/G’s offer.  In the letter she states, “Your offer reveals that you don’t really understand me or what this conflict is all about. It’s about freedom, not money.  I certainly don’t relish the idea of losing my business, my home, and everything else that your lawsuit threatens to take from my family, but my freedom to honor God in doing what I do best is more important.”

Apr 11 2014

You’re Free to have My Opinion

 

 

The recent events surrounding the forced resignation of Brendan Eich from Mozilla FireFox have Americans from all walks of life enraged that such a blatant degradation of the basic rights of the individual should happen in this Nation. Mr. Eich was forced to resign and write a letter of apology to homosexuals after it was learned he made a donation to a Pro-Traditional family organization. It is more than ironic that the CEO for the organization that demanded Eich’s resignation is also “guilty” of making a donation to the same organization.

 

This travesty against American freedom is coiling around the framework of our Nation’s foundation like the slither of a constricting snake, binding and crushing until all freedom and life are gone. A fellow worker grilled a staffer from Penn State until she “admitted” that she supported traditional marriage. She was terminated. Craig James, former New England Patriot running back turned analyst for Fox Sports was heard voicing his support for traditional marriage. He was dismissed from Fox Sports.

 

The litany of attacks on Christians and Conservatives over this issue goes on and on. We were promised this would not happen. Homosexuals simply wanted equal standing and the same rights as heterosexuals. But it seems expressing an opinion, I believe we call it free speech, is a right afforded only to certain persuasions and ideologies. All others must be silenced. Even liberal commentator Bill Maher calls this the beginning of the “gay mafia”.

 

Free speech is a Right, but marriage is not. Still, this fallacy is the foundation for much of the gay marriage agenda. They believe that homosexuals have been discriminated against. They demand the same “right” to marriage as heterosexuals. But marriage is not a right. It is a rite. For some a religious rite, for others a rite of passage, a coming of age, and these rites are influenced by the social structure and ethnicity of the families, which pass down these traditions, these rites.

 

Traditional marriage is protected under the Constitution in at least two different areas: The Freedom of Religion (Religious Rites) and the Pursuit of Happiness (Social and Ethnic Rites). These are the two basic reasons the persecuted sought out the New World: To worship as they pleased and to raise their children in the way they saw fit. Ah, but we the enlightened have legislated to the American people that the heterosexual traditions of marriage, created by heterosexuals for heterosexuals for the purpose of passing traditions on to posterity, are no longer protected, do not belong to them exclusively, and must be handed over to homosexuals on the basis that homosexuals are predisposed to their sexual orientation.

 

By law, we have now entered into the private lives of every American and given government the authority to sit in judgment of every tradition passed down through family generations. Those who hold the power of government can dictate to you your faith, your values, and your home. If you disagree with this “enlightenment”, you are to be silenced, your livelihood taken away, and who knows what other persecutions will be meted out to you for the sin of an opinion.

 

While the majority of scientists agree that there is no proof of a genetic disposition to homosexuality, still we as Americans are allowing our freedoms to be trampled for the sake of a hypothesis. Therein lies the greatest travesty of all. The fault lies with us.

 

Sir Edmund Burke famously said, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”. Our Nation is filled with good men, good women, but we have sat silently as our liberties are being squeezed out all around, all in the name of tolerance to a lifestyle choice. So, who then is to blame for our family traditions held hostage, our fellow citizens brutalized by the “gay mafia”, and the fundamental fabric of our Nation torn apart? The silence is deafening.