The bullying tactics and lawsuits that the radical homosexual agenda activists are using against the freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of association rights of Christian-owned businesses has an agenda list that includes goals like the following:
1. Shut up about your homosexual “marriage” disagreements.
2. We will paint you as “bigoted,” “intolerant,” “homophobic” and “extremist terrorists;” thus purposely squelching your freedoms as they are listed in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution so that they no longer apply. Why? Because we leftist bullies said so!
3. We aim to replace your First Amendment rights with our “special” rights in order to end your religious beliefs and biblically based “bigotry” against our homosexual agenda.
4. Furthermore, we will sue you into compliance, and then use the money we get to send more homosexual activists out to “catch” you in your bigotry, sue another Christian business owner, get a judge that sympathizes with our cause to rule in our favor, cause you to lose your business and maybe even your house…and even go so far as to cause you to lose everything! Blather…rinse…repeat.
Well, the list could go on and on. However, maybe Rush Limbaugh has the solution to counter all of this bullying by the leftist haters, anti-religion bigots, intolerant bullies and the gay Gestapo terrorists.
The Federalist Papers: Advice For Christian Businesses On How to Defeat Leftist Bullies.
Excerpt:
We’ve seen the outcry over Christian businesses being unwilling to participate in “same-sex” wedding ceremonies.
Bakers, florists, and photographers have all been attacked for standing firm on their faith.
Some have been fined, some have been sued, and some have been forced to close. All of this has been in the name of left-wing “tolerance.”
Many of these businesses are fighting back in the courts and legislatures from the bullies that are hell-bent on destroying both the businesses and personal lives of Christians.
But now, Rush Limbaugh has come up with a “politically correct”, “tolerant” solution to these attacks. He explains:
[I ] pointed out the other day, well, then should we maybe stop flouting and flaunting gay marriage, because gay marriage is really disapproved in Islam. Gay marriage, homosexual behavior is not tolerated, it is not permitted, and it is punished severely when it is caught, when it’s spied. And yet in American media all over the place we are celebrating gay marriage, we are flaunting gay marriage, and I ask, does this not also offend Muslims?
Where do we draw the line, I asked poignantly, in what aspects of Islam we will respect and others we will ignore. When it comes to pictures of the cartoon drawings of the prophet, we will absolutely obey the demands of militant Islam and we will not only refrain from drawing cartoons, we will condemn and seek to destroy anybody who does. But MSNBC, CNN, TIME magazine, the New York Times can readily, happily promote gay marriage and gay rights all day long, and the Muslims are supposed [to] shut up about it?
[Therefore] I have an idea. I know that many of you out there run businesses that if a gay couple, a married gay couple came in and asked for your service, you would deny it on the basis that you disapprove, your religion does not sanction the approval of gay marriage.
My idea for you is quite simple. Don’t use that as the excuse anymore. Let’s say that you own the ABC wedding cake bakery. The only thing you do is you bake wedding cakes. And as such, militant gay activists target your bakery. They’re gonna take you out, they’re gonna take you down, they’re gonna walk in there, they’re gonna tell you they’re gonna get married, and of all the bakeries in the world, yours has been recommended to them because that’s all you do, therefore you must be better than anybody else at baking wedding cakes.
Instead of telling the gay couple that you refuse to bake the cake for their wedding because you disapprove of homosexuality, you should now say you are not going to bake a cake for the gay wedding because you fear Muslim backlash. Or, due to your respect of Islam, you cannot bake a cake for a gay wedding. See how that flies. Since the left is agreeing, a bunch of people on the left have gone on TV, “I hate to say this, you know, Limbaugh’s got a point. We do flaunt gay marriage at ’em, wow. Wow. That’s a good point. I mean, we readily agree not to do the thing with the prophet and the pictures and the cartoons, but gay marriage, yeah, we’re kind of in their face on that.”
Well, just make a note. Any of you small business owners who think you’re gonna get a visit from a gay couple asking you for your product or service at a gay wedding just say, “Nah, nah, nah, we refuse because of our respect of Islam. We can’t.” Don’t say anything about your religion. Don’t say anything about it’s your religion that prevents you from doing it. Say it’s Islam. You respect Islam or you’re afraid of Muslim backlash. See how that flies. It’s just an idea. Hope it works.
This is brilliant! Since Islam is now a “politically correct” religion in the Obama Administration and in the media, why not invoke respect for Islam as the reason for not providing special services to “same-sex” weddings since such events are horribly offensive to Muslims?
The Politistick also wrote about this idea.
One comment there expresses why homosexuality run rampant in a culture eventually leads to its destruction.
Joel
May 13, 2015 #1Plato wrote that homosexuality is an outrage, a violation of nature. Acceptance of this unnatural act is to turn society upside down. We see this turning upside down today in California’s bathroom law. The ancient Spartan’s demonstrated that the spirit of homosexuality is a predator, pedophile spirit. We see this today as advocates of this transgression are now encouraging cross generational homosexual sex; sex between adults and children. Scripture says it’s a capital offense, an unspeakable transgression. When the spirit of homosexuality takes over a community, justice is completely perverted. God left a warning to the nations that allow themselves to be corrupted by such a spirit: Sodom, Gomorrah, and Pompeii were all destroyed by fire for the sin of homosexuality. A community’s attempt to encourage and legalize this perversion will result in God’s wrath in the nature of fire and utter destruction. The hope of the nations and for the protection of children from state sanctioned rape is the enacted justice of God. People do not have to act out their sinful passions. Jesus said, “deny yourself.” The ancients considered chastity a virtue and godlike. If you’re caught in this sin call on the name of the Lord for your release, and be saved from the coming wrath of God. Plato writes in his Laws,” the crime of male with male, or female with female, is an outrage on nature and a capital surrender to lust of pleasure.” ARTICLE VIII – Constitutional Amendment – Making God’s law American Law that makes homosexuality a capital offense. articleviii.wordpress.com
The writer of that comment wants to “make God’s law American Law that makes homosexuality a capital offense.” Well, THAT will never happen.
So, what is the answer to the current dilemma of religious rights vs. homosexual activists demands to comply with their sinful agenda?
Maybe, for now, it might be to use the “offense to Muslims” argument? What are your thoughts on this?
If the Supreme Court rules to grant same-sex marriage as the law of the land (similar to how the horrendous 1973 abortion decision to allow the killing of unborn babies in the womb came down), how are Bible-based Christians supposed to stand up for their faith, keep their businesses, and keep from being fined out of house and home (or, even jailed!) when they refuse to comply?
Don’t think it will happen?
It’s already happening! Do a search for Baronelle Stutzman’s case!
I pray that the SC decision does come forth to protect traditional, biblically based marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
No matter what direction the decision turns out to be, the gay Gestapo will stop at NOTHING to get their way.
Does the term “gay Gestapo” offend you? Well, do a search for the guy named “Dan Savage” in this photo:
Also see:
Anti-Bullying Speaker Curses Christian Teens.
How’s that for an oxy-moronic headline?
Newsbusters: The Real Dan Savage: The Bully Against Bullying.
It might be a good thing to be armed with reasons to stump them and stop their deliberate attempts to sue and get more money for their nefarious goals and agenda… which is obviously to silence all objection to their aberrant behaviors and make Christian beliefs and faith illegal here in America.
That is their end game, people.
Hat tip:
The Federalist Papers: Advice For Christian Businesses On How to Defeat Leftist Bullies.
Hat tips to all links.
Tags: answering critics, Bible, faith in Jesus, gay Gestapo, homosexual bullies, politics, propaganda, radical homosexual agenda, religious freedom, truth
Talk Wisdom 
May 29, 2015 at 5:57 pm |
Shortly after I posted this, True Discernment wrote:
OBAMA TO FORCE FAITH-BASED GRANT RECIPIENTS TO HIRE LGBTS
LikeLike
May 29, 2015 at 8:35 pm |
Gasbag: “Instead of telling the gay couple that you refuse to bake the cake for their wedding because you disapprove of homosexuality, you should now say you are not going to bake a cake for the gay wedding because you fear Muslim backlash. Or, due to your respect of Islam, you cannot bake a cake for a gay wedding. See how that flies.”
CJW: This is brilliant! Since Islam is now a “politically correct” religion in the Obama Administration and in the media, why not invoke respect for Islam as the reason for not providing special services to “same-sex” weddings since such events are horribly offensive to Muslims?
Because Christians (at least the ones who frequent this blog) have no respect for Islam. Heck, the average evangelical doesn’t even have much respect for Presbyterians, let alone Sunnis! You’ve always dissed Muslims and their “false moon-god” on your blogs, so I know you’re unconcerned about not being ‘horribly offensive’ to them.
The only religion Christians actually respect is Judaism, but they have a historically poor record of treating its members well.
I think it also may be embarrassing to admit that Muslims take their religion way more seriously than the followers of Christ do. After all, your god also tells you to kill homosexuals. I’ve been asking you for years on these very pages why you haven’t been doing it, and you’ve constantly shrugged it off with phrases like “Jesus lifted than injunction”. Yet you haven’t produced anything in print or by implication that that’s true. If, as you boast, “God’s Word stands forever!” then that means all of it, not just the parts you like. That also means you’ll burn in hell forever for eating at Red Lobster™, or wearing slacks (if you’re female), or wearing cotton-linen clothing at all.
Why should you ‘fear Muslim backlash’? Isn’t your god “in control”? Has he not ‘overcome the world’? To say that you fear what Muslims might do sounds almost as if you have some doubts about what you’ve been saying…and you don’t, do you? Why should you fear the ‘gay Gestapo’ when ‘God’s Gestapo’ outnumbers it by tens of millions? Why should you fear at all, when you know you’ve got the all-powerful Lord of the Universe at your back?
If you haven’t got the nads to bloody your own hands killing gays, why not invite a few thousand ISIS idiots over to do it for you?
Also, why aren’t you doing anything about this?
This is just the thing you’ve been bloviating about!
I know there are lots of events you don’t attend because you don’t want to. It’s easy to add same-sex weddings to that list. Go ahead, try it.
LikeLike
May 30, 2015 at 2:22 pm |
GM,
I made a correction just now to my original post. I should have placed quotation marks around the paragraph that you quoted as mine in your comment. Those words, in fact, came from the author of the linked article. I apologize for the error.
I am hoping to get some comments from Christian followers of this blog before I comment further.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this issue.
LikeLike
June 2, 2015 at 9:34 pm
Hello Christine!
Ah yes, the “Maverick” is back, riding to the rescue of the fair-maiden! Just kidding. But I did want to point out a minor flaw in our good friend’s Mr. Pilot’s writing skills. Now, I’m sure I’m not as educated as Mr. Pilot (though I was overwhelmingly voted “most intellectual” of my graduation class). I think a sentence needs to have a point. This left me hanging … “Because Christians (at least the ones who frequent this blog) have no respect for Islam.” “Because … “what???
It’s difficult at times to track with a far left wing atheist (or whatever Mr. Pilot claims to be).
And this I find stunning coming from a great mind … well versed in the Bible: “After all, your god also tells you to kill homosexuals. I’ve been asking you for years on these very pages why you haven’t been doing it, and you’ve constantly shrugged it off with phrases like “Jesus lifted than injunction. Yet you haven’t produced anything in print or by implication that that’s true.”
Now I believe the “print” of the matter is all throughout the New Testament. The “implication” is … well, why don’t Mr. Pilot reveal to us the last time Christians have supported or partook of the slaying of homosexuals? S l o w e r now, the “implication” is that Christians do not kill homosexuals.
Christine, have you slain a homosexual lately? I haven’t. I can’t name one Christian who has and I know a lot of them. But alas! We’re going to hell because we don’t do that. Bummer.
You know Christine, I’m not sure what hell will be like. I don’t feel like repeating what Christ said in this comment. It’s there for all to read.
The things I do know is that soon enough everyone will get exactly what they’ve asked and lived for.
Atheists and unbelievers … “Leave me alone. I don’t want to hear about God, and I don’t need Him.” Not to worry, your wish will be granted, but it’s wise to be careful what you wish for.
Those who want God … what a wonderful thing.
The Atheists and unbelievers will have an eternity without God, that I do know. Even though they share many things believers have from God … Sunshine, nature and rain. I believe it’s written “all good things come from God.”
I think the most frightening thing is to exist without anything from God, nothing. I was thinking about that the other day and regardless of “burning for eternity,” actually not seeing or feeling any of God’s wonders which are constantly around us …
I hope you and your family have a great week!
LikeLiked by 1 person
June 2, 2015 at 10:40 pm
Oh Steve…if you only could know how great your comment is for this topic! Well…I’m telling you – it was wonderful and so true!
This past Sunday, our pastor discussed the parable of the weeds and fish (Matthew 13:10-17, 24-30, 34-36). I plan to write a post about it but what you shared here today was similar to what our pastor said! Here are some of my notes:
Steve wrote:
I love it when God stirs your heart to come over here and share some wisdom and truth! It’s amazing how you shared what you did and it was similar to our pastor’s message this week!
Thank you my friend! God bless and have a great week too!
LikeLike
May 29, 2015 at 9:27 pm |
Can we please disabuse ourselves of this ridiculous idea that being required to bake a wedding cake in any way impinges on religious freedom?
Bakers are required by law to serve Bar Mitzvah clients. Surely rejecting Christ as the Messiah is at least as sinful as gay people committing themselves to lifetime mutual self-sacrifice and fidelity. In no way does making a cake (or taking photos, or providing center pieces, or otherwise selling services to bar mitzvah clients) endorse the rejection of Christ as the Messiah or make the vendor a participant in this Jewish rite of passage.
The “participating in (or condoning) sin” arguments are bogus. Such objections are mired in hypocrisy that betrays a unique contempt for couples who are gay. That’s simply not OK. Such contempt should not be abided in society any more than anti-semitism should be allowed. Anti-gay Christians should not pretend that their beliefs aren’t bigoted; and, more importantly, shouldn’t clutch their pearls and feign incredulity when their bigotry is not tolerated in society.
LikeLiked by 1 person
May 30, 2015 at 2:24 pm |
Hello Frannie. Welcome back to my blog.
I am hoping to get some comments from Christian followers of this blog before I comment further.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this issue.
LikeLike
May 30, 2015 at 2:59 pm |
Reblogged this on A Conservative Christian Man.
LikeLike
May 30, 2015 at 3:05 pm |
Disconnect from any government financial program, including being a controlled 501 (c)(3) tax exempt church. We are destined to undergo persecution and hate, to have all our worldly possessions taken from us, to be imprisoned and hated, even killed because we stand fast in our faith. Pray hard, connect with other true followers of our Lord and Master Jesus Christ.
LikeLiked by 1 person
May 30, 2015 at 3:21 pm |
To my Christian friends and visitors. Please feel free to share…right, wrong, good, bad, or indifferent…what did you really think about Limbaugh’s idea?
LikeLike
May 30, 2015 at 4:05 pm |
Since you’re going out of your way to be courteous, I shall respond in kind.
You quoted a comment from Joel at Politistick, and published two posts from Mr. Lemmen.
In fact, I agree fully with the latter: Disconnect from any government financial program, including being a 501 (c)(3) tax-exempt church.
It’s not the government’s business to decide who may marry whom, as long as we’re talking about two consenting adult humans. If two people wish to marry, it’s the government’s job to see they have equal protection under the law: an actual license, visitation rights, inheritance rights and so on. If such a couple wants to have it acknowledged by a church, let the church accept or reject them, as it chooses. But that won’t affect the legality of the union. Churches don’t punish for, say, bigamy, but in the secular world bigamy will land you in jail.
Anyway, what I wanted to say here was that you already have at least one comment from a Christian follower of this blog. I can understand why you’d like to have more, but you don’t need someone else’s words to speak your thoughts! You never have before, and I know you’re more articulate than that.
LikeLike
May 30, 2015 at 4:28 pm |
The trouble is, GM, Christian business owners do not fall under being a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt church.
What they DO fall under is the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Therefore, we see the dilemma.
It is a choice of keeping religious freedoms intact (including speech, religion and the free exercise thereof, and freedom of association), or trump such rights for religious business owners in order to create new special rights for homosexual demands.
Which one should trump the other?
One or the other will be subjected to “discrimination” (as the lefties like to quote it) if same-sex “marriage” becomes the unfettered law of the land across America.
If this happens, I pray that the justices will have the forethought to include a religious freedom exemption that allows Christian, Jewish, and even Muslim business owners the right to refuse to participate in any part of a same-sex ceremony.
LikeLike
May 30, 2015 at 5:32 pm
CJW: The trouble is, GM, Christian business owners do not fall under being a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt church.
Which means they must operate like any other business in this country—they are not allowed to discriminate against other races, or religions, or creeds. So what’s the trouble?
What they DO fall under is the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Therefore, we see the dilemma.
The people on the other side ALSO fall under the First Amendment. There’s no ‘dilemma’ here.
It is a choice of keeping religious freedoms intact, or trump such rights for religious business owners in order to create new special rights for homosexual demands.
Exactly what do you mean by ‘special rights’? Getting married is not considered a special right. What were the old special rights for homosexual demands? The ‘right’ to walk home without getting beaten up, perhaps? I wasn’t aware they had any ‘rights’ at all.
Which one should trump the other?
Neither. No ‘trump’ is necessary, except in the minds of those who think “my way MUST prevail!” That is desire for social supremacy, and no one, especially in a society like ours, has the right to expect government give it to them. Your ranting about the ‘gay Gestapo’ is fear that the weight of the law will swing in their favor.
One or the other will be subjected to “discrimination” (as the lefties like to quote it) if same-sex “marriage” becomes the unfettered law of the land across America.
Horse puckey. So-called “religious freedom” laws are in fact asking for the right to discriminate. Any ‘Christian’ business has the right to refuse anyone they don’t like (“We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone” signs were common during the Civil Rights era). What they want is the right to be immune to the consequences.
If this happens, I pray that the justices will have the forethought to include a religious freedom exemption that allows Christian, Jewish, and even Muslim business owners the right to refuse to participate in any part of a same-sex ceremony.
You mean they don’t have that right now?! When did that happen?
It appears to me that the only reason this is happening is because some Christians believe that sin is the most important thing, while others believe that sinners are. I don’t pretend to know what Jesus might have said, but I suspect he might have behaved as he did to the woman at the well.
His alleged followers seem to be incapable of that.
LikeLike
May 30, 2015 at 5:51 pm
GM: “Exactly what do you mean by ‘special rights’?”
The “special right” to redefine the centuries-old, instituted by God definition of marriage. The “special right” to force a business owner (see Baronelle Stutzman case) to participate in a same-sex ceremony that her religious beliefs won’t allow her to. BTW, Ms. Stutzman had been creating flower arrangements for the two gay men that came into her store regularly. She has stated that she has always been very friendly and accommodating towards them, except when they wanted her services (which would force her to reject and violate God’s idea of marriage being between a man and a woman and approve of what they were doing) for their same-sex wedding. She politely declined and gave them several references for other flower shops that could help them. Unfortunately, this male couple decided to sue her for discrimination; despite the fact that she explained that her relationship with Jesus Christ cannot sanction such a ceremony.
Despite all the bad treatment and expense, she says that she still loves the two gay men and would “give them hugs” if she ran into them again, but she adamantly refuses to betray Jesus (like the 30 pieces of silver that Judas obtained by doing so) because of the lawsuits being filed against her. You can do a search and read all about her case. Apparently, a liberal judge (who sided with the gay men) decided to punish her with a huge fine, but the case is on appeal through the Alliance Defending Freedom organization.
There is a BIG difference between discrimination against a person of color (inherited trait) vs. a behavior (chosen by the person). This is where the “tolerance” train goes off track…IMHO.
Here’s a good link for Baronelle Stutzman’s case:
https://alliancedefendingfreedom.org/arlene-flowers?referral=I0215ARLF1
Be sure to watch the video here (if it works) or at the link above.
LikeLike
May 30, 2015 at 5:57 pm
From Alliance Defending Freedom site:
LikeLike
May 30, 2015 at 4:18 pm |
You Better Listen to What Marco Rubio Is Saying About the Assault on Christianity.
My blogging friend Father Paul Lemmon alerted me to this article and transcript from the Rush Limbaugh radio show website. I’m so glad that Rush weighed in on what Marco Rubio said while being interviewed by CBN (Christian Broadcasting Network).
I also hope that Rubio will bring this issue up during the GOP primary debates!
More Americans need to know the truth about what is really going on! Recall my post entitled, If it Weren’t for My TV, I Wouldn’t Know What is Real? Brandon Heath was being critical of what is being spewed in the media when he wrote that lyric!
It also serves as a warning (we’re under attack) to many who might be fooled by the untruths put forth in the media and entertainment industry. The ruse being fed (masquerading as the “truth”), the tricks being used to fool unsuspecting persons who don’t know any better or are ignorant of the truth, and the stratagem being forced into the minds of those who (either ignore, dismiss or reject that this is happening) don’t notice the evil, sin, and death being perpetrated upon us via the media of mass deception; desperately needs to be exposed!
Eph 5:11
And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them.
LikeLike
May 30, 2015 at 7:40 pm |
Oh yeah…and about the fear of “insulting Muslims,” take a look at this post at Fellowship of the Minds: Muslims in Minnesota want sharia law in America; approve of killing those who insult Muhammad.
Ah yes…the religion of “peace.”
LikeLike
May 30, 2015 at 8:53 pm |
Okay, I read it. Now tell me that this isn’t equally insane.
According to pewforum.org:
“The Roman Catholic Church alone has nearly 200 diocesan tribunals that handle a variety of cases, including an estimated 15,000 to 20,000 marriage annulments each year. In addition, many Orthodox Jews use rabbinical courts to obtain religious divorces, resolve business conflicts and settle other disputes with fellow Jews. Similarly, many Muslims appeal to Islamic clerics to resolve marital disputes and other disagreements with fellow Muslims.”
So exactly what about sharia law gets your knickers twisted?
Even those who call for sharia law must know that it applies only to Muslims; it means nothing to people like me (or you) and it goes against their faith to try to apply it to non-believers. But then, I suspect most Muslims are as ignorant about their faith as most Christians are–they know only what the holy men tell them, and don’t study it much on their own.
Neither the haredis nor the sharias are allowed to usurp federal law. That includes such things as…oh, murder, for example. They can’t even do it in the birthplace of those religions, so what makes them think it can be applied to a 21st-century secular society?
Even if all 15,000 Muslims in Minneapolis decided that they wanted sharia, they’d probably change their minds within the first ten days, when they realized what was now forbidden to them.
But the Religion of Peace and the Prince of Peace want that peace on their terms only, and they both disagree bitterly on what those terms are. That’s reason enough to have nothing whatever to do with either of them.
Now can we get back to the topic of this thread?
LikeLike
May 30, 2015 at 10:13 pm
GM wrote:
Did you miss the part where not obeying sharia law (especially the “infidels” which includes me and you?) means death?
OK. On to the original topic.
GM also wrote:
So…did you miss the comment and video that I posted within this comment thread about Baronelle Stutzman?
LikeLike
June 3, 2015 at 11:44 pm
To even suggest ” sharia law must know that it applies only to Muslims; it means nothing to people like me (or you) and it goes against their faith to try to apply it to non-believers” is about the most absurd statement I’ve ever read. In fact I don’t even feel like formulating more of a response. “Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou be like unto him.”
Sometimes I just have to shake my head because I’m really beginning to think dementia is setting in on our friend Mr. Pilot.
LikeLike
May 30, 2015 at 10:48 pm |
No I didn’t, but there was no “Reply” link attached to it. I’ll respond to that now.
GM: “Exactly what do you mean by ‘special rights’?”
The “special right” to redefine the centuries-old, instituted by God definition of marriage.
Marriage is not a “special right”. People do it all the time. What you’re attempting to do is say to a certain group of people “We’re not going to let you do what everyone else is allowed to do.” Heck, even slaves were allowed to marry; the law wasn’t required to acknowledge it, of course. Things are a little different now.
There is a BIG difference between discrimination against a person of color (inherited trait) vs. a behavior (chosen by the person). This is where the “tolerance” train goes off track…IMHO.
IYHO. You’re not a ‘person of color’, and you’re a Christian only by your ‘behavior’…supposedly.
It sounds very much as if the two men were behaving like dicks (if that offends you, too bad: it’s blunt and describes their behavior perfectly). It also sounds as if Baronelle Stutzman is more moral than her god. She didn’t scold them, she didn’t call them names, she didn’t damn them to hell and she certainly didn’t attempt to kill them; she simply refused them, told them why, and offered to send them to an associate who would fill their order.
In short, she did everything a proprietor might be expected to do. I’d have been glad to speak for her.
As a businessperson, she knew their money spent as well as anyone else’s—up to a point.
Are you sure homosexuality is merely a ‘behavior’? Because I can’t conceive of anyone waking up one morning and deciding,
“This ian’t working for me. I think I’ll be gay. I get to hang with cool people, but I’ll have to be careful who I associate with, since most people will hate me on principle; and I’ll have to forego anything but business relationships with women (they don’t interest me anyway). My friends might shun me, my parents will be horrified, and the pastor will probably expel me from church. If not, he may force me into therapy or something. If they find out at work, I might lose my job, so I better be careful there. There’s still that AIDS thing, so I’ll have to watch for that, and when I get older, some might ask me why I’m not married…they’ll probably guess. And even if I find someone who’s right for me, we can’t get married legally. We can only live together, and everyone will guess. I’ll have to get used to all those hateful names, too, but…who gives a whoop. Bring on the sex!!”
No, I just can’t see anybody willingly accepting that. Being gay isn’t like joining the army.
LikeLike
May 30, 2015 at 10:52 pm |
ADF: Opponents of the natural family claim to seek tolerance for their view of marriage as the “emotional bond between two people” instead of “the lifelong commitment between one man and one woman.” But now, we’re seeing more cases where those who disagree with their view of
marriage are severely punished and forced to violate their faith.
Yeah, and those who disagree with their sect’s idea of marriage are punished by the civil authorities, too. This isn’t 1750s France; the government isn’t supposed to do the church’s dirty work!
This “Tyranny of Tolerance,” as Pope Benedict XVI called it, claims that the “sexual rights” of some are more important than the religious rights of others.
Uh huh. Did Benedict tell that to the kids whose “sexual rights” were violated by his fellows, and did they concur?
Essentially, you’re free to believe whatever you choose; you just can’t act on it.
That’s right. You can scream “homos must die” all day long, as the late Mr Phelps did, but if you act on your beliefs and kill one, your “religious rights” will not save you from the consequences.
That’s not too hard for the ADF to understand. Why not you?
…If you are forced to separate your faith from your life, your religious freedom ceases to exist.
If your faith tells you disease comes from devils and not germs, I don’t want you as my doctor. If your faith tells you that only those who believe as you do are worthy of life–or even respect–I don’t want you as my neighbor, let alone my legislator.
LikeLike
June 2, 2015 at 4:18 pm |
There have always been limitations put upon “people” regarding who is able to marry whom. So, your answer that “people do it all the time” is inaccurate.
Sexual activity is a behavior. No one can refute that truth.
No, I’m not a Christian only by behavior. Perhaps I could write a new blog post about that to better explain why.
Yes – I would appreciate it if you would choose to use less offensive language.
As far as Stutzman’s situation goes, it is likely that many of us do not know the entire story. I would venture to guess that perhaps these men were “challenged” by gay rights activists to do this awful thing to their “friend” Baronelle. It’s what they do! And the gays who do not care whether or not gay “marriage” becomes a new right (especially those who are against it!) oftentimes share their views online expressing dissent against the activists. Of course, since they aren’t “politically correct” in their beliefs, their voices aren’t heard on the media of mass deception.
As I already pointed out within this comment thread, there are vicious homosexual activists (like Dan Savage) who aren’t interested in tolerance – at all !. Their entire goal in this life is to use the courts to pressure Christians and others who reject the concept of gay “marriage” into submission to their demands, and they go so far as to punish those who speak out against their radical agenda and refuse to comply.
We don’t even know how many small business owners have been intimidated into submission to the gay Gestapo demands. It takes courage, and the realization that they might not only lose their livelihoods, but also their money and even homes when the liberal judges rule against them! Brave business owners (like Stutzman and the couple who got sued because they refused to bake a cake for a homosexual “wedding”) refused to back down and stand up for their religious freedom rights – despite the cost.
It is a very sad time here in America. 0bama’s “fundamental transformation” includes not only just stomping on the rights of Americans (that he obviously hates) that are listed in the Constitution, but tearing the document up and destroying those Americans with whom he and his puppeteers and minions disagree! Hitlery was recently quoted as saying that religious people need to change their beliefs – so that they will agree with her demonic political views! Awful !!!
No – Baronelle Stutzman does not consider herself more moral than God. That will be a good subject for another blog post too. Since Baronelle reads, studies and follows God’s Word, what Jesus said in these verses would be enough to understand why she would not agree with your statement.
Mat 19:17
So He said to him, “Why do you call Me good? [fn] No one is good but One, that is, God. [fn] But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”
Mar 10:18
So Jesus said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God.
Luk 18:19
So Jesus said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God.
Isaiah would agree:
Isa 64:6
But we are all like an unclean thing,
And all our righteousnesses are like filthy rags;
We all fade as a leaf,
And our iniquities, like the wind,
Have taken us away.
This verse in Psalms describes how high above us that God is in His righteousness:
Psa 71:19
Also Your righteousness, O God, is very high,
You who have done great things;
O God, who is like You?
Peter informs us where righteousness lives and how we can be covered in Christ’s righteousness:
2Pe 1:1
Simon Peter, a bondservant and apostle of Jesus Christ,
To those who have obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:
2Pe 1:2
Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord,
2Pe 1:3
as His divine power has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who called us by glory and virtue,
2Pe 1:4
by which have been given to us exceedingly great and precious promises, that through these you may be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.
Maybe I don’t need to that new post about it after all. God’s Word answered your false supposition.
LikeLike
June 3, 2015 at 11:54 pm |
There have always been limitations put upon “people” regarding who is able to marry whom. So, your answer that “people do it all the time” is inaccurate.
Yet you want to enforce one particular limitation. A murderer in prison can marry, as long as they’re straight, but not a law-abiding citizen who isn’t sexually agreeable to you. But people do marry all the time—that activity is in no danger of ending. You just want to exclude certain ‘people’ from participating in it.
No, I’m not a Christian only by behavior. Perhaps I could write a new blog post about that to better explain why.
Write away! But judging from the tone of the millions of words you’ve already written, especially since 2008, you’re probably a CINO. I stand by my statement.
Yes – I would appreciate it if you would choose to use less offensive language.
Then you should set a better example on this blog, with your own language, instead of saying “Yes, I call them that because they deserve it!!” If you won’t do that, then don’t deny me the right to do the same.
As far as Stutzman’s situation goes, it is likely that many of us do not know the entire story.
You could have stopped right there, and I’d have agreed with you. Instead, you began spouting that ‘since they’re not politically correct…’ hogwash, and let your own political perspective take over. You did that two months ago, when you tried to link a German civil pilot to an “Islamic mass-murder” plane crash…although there was no evidence whatever indicating that.
You do that a lot.
As I already pointed out within this comment thread, there are vicious homosexual activists (like Dan Savage) who aren’t interested in tolerance – at all !.
But there aren’t any equally vicious activists on the other side. All of them are interested in tolerance. Suuuure they are.
I did not say that Baronelle Stutzman was more moral than her god. I said that I regard her as being more moral than her god, and gave reasons why I think so. She treated those two men contrary to the instructions in Leviticus, so all your subsequent bible juju was unnecessary.
Read what I wrote, not what you think I wrote.
LikeLike
June 2, 2015 at 4:24 pm |
P.S. About the late Mr. Phelps. Did you know that he was a lifelong Democrat? Do you know why his “church” and family members (many of whom are lawyers) picket against causes that they disagree with? It’s how they make their money! THAT is the bottom line with those people. They hope to aggravate enough people in order to get them to cause an altercation so that they can sue them for damages. They are con artists!
Sounds like a left-wing lunatic fringe group to me.
LikeLike
June 3, 2015 at 5:23 pm |
You’ve pointed out Phelps’ political leanings before. But he’s not remembered for his politics. It’s the “god hates fags” bluster that made him…you know…stand out.
As for the rest: you should know a thing or two about con artists. You’ve endorsed Walid Shoebat, and Sarah Palin, and you still support WND, despite their record of endless mutations of the US Constitution, your second favorite document.
LikeLike