Posted on 04/01/2015 4:22:34 PM PDT by Kaslin
Protesters are demonstrating, the Obama administration is speaking out, the mainstream media is in an uproar, major companies are threatening boycotts, and even the NCAA is concerned that a new bill signed into law by Indiana Gov. Mike Pence could negatively impact the “inclusive” culture of college sports.
Why such an extreme reaction to a bill simply reinforcing the religious freedoms of all Americans?
Could it be that conservative Americans have dared to fight back against gay activists and their allies?
Writing in the National Review, Patrick Brennan noted that, “When Indiana governor Mike Pence signed a religious-liberty-protection statute into law this past week, he probably didn’t expect the activist backlash and accusations that he’d just endorsed or legalized discrimination. In part, that would be due to the fact that dozens of states and the federal government have had similar laws for years and there’s been no epidemic of discrimination against gays and lesbians.”
To be sure, as Brennan noted, the current bill and the federal bill (and other, individual state bills) are not identical, but they are close enough to raise the question of, “Why the outcry now?”
As Josh Blackman pointed out, also in the National Review, “the Indiana law is modeled on the 1993 federal law of the same name, and that counterparts have been adopted in 19 other states. Further, four federal courts of appeals and the Obama Justice Department have all taken the position that RFRA [the Religious Freedom Restoration Act] can be used as a defense in private suits involving the enforcement of laws that substantially burden free exercise of religion.”
Exactly.
So, to ask once more, why all the histrionics?
When Gov. Pence signed the bill into law, he said, “Today I signed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, because I support the freedom of religion for every Hoosier of every faith. The Constitution of the United States and the Indiana Constitution both provide strong recognition of the freedom of religion but today, many people of faith feel their religious liberty is under attack by government action.”
And it is for good reason that many people of faith feel this way, as has been documented almost endlessly in recent years. Shouldn’t every freedom-loving American celebrate this bill?
Not if you ask Apple CEO Tim Cook, himself gay, who stated in an op-ed for the Washington Times, “There’s something very dangerous happening in states across the country.
“A wave of legislation, introduced in more than two dozen states, would allow people to discriminate against their neighbors.”
According to Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson, also proudly gay, “This is old-fashioned discrimination all dressed up in ecclesiastical vestments and ‘religious freedom’ language.”
Having lost our battle against same-sex “marriage,” Robinson claims, we are now fighting to legalize our anti-gay animus.
Even Mark Emmert, president of the NCAA, which oversees all college athletics, expressed his concerns over the bill, to the point that there was even talk of relocating one of the most prestigious sports events in America – the NCAA’s basketball Final Four – from Indiana to another location, on just a few days’ notice.
Yes, even playing basketball in Indiana could negatively affect collegiate athletes. (Ultimately, Emmert said that the games would not be relocated for now.)
Certainly, there are some sincere people who believe that, with the passing of this bill, a gay victim of a car accident could be refused ambulatory or medical care because of someone’s purported religious beliefs, a scenario that Gov. Pence and every conservative I know would denounce as utterly reprehensible and contrary to the law.
That’s why Daniel O. Conkle a professor and legal scholar who is a pro-gay rights and same-sex “marriage” advocate, explained that “despite all the rhetoric — the bill has little to do with same-sex marriage and everything to do with religious freedom.”
Prof. Conkle actually supported the bill and felt it was both good and needed.
Why then the shrill outcry? Why then the threats to boycott? Why then the histrionics?
This is reminiscent of what happens when a child who is used to getting his way is firmly told, “No,” or when a bully is successfully backed down. The reaction, to put it mildly, is overblown.
Could this explain why the response to the bill has been so intense, at times even hysterical?
(Although I’ll surely be misquoted here, while I have compared gay activists to bullies in the past, I am not comparing them here to children. I’m drawing a parallel to the nature of the reactions.)
Hugh Hewitt rightly noted that, “The religious community, of course is the last institution standing against what the LGBT community wants. The church has been specifically targeted. Rather than live with accommodation, the LGBT community now seeks to use the force of government to control religious opposition to their desires.”
And so any legislature that stands up for our essential freedoms can expect a similar firestorm.
Now is the time to make it clear that we’re not about to back down or cave in to the pressure and bad press, declaring once again that the bullying will back fire.
As I’ve said many times before, the unspoken mantra of gay activism is, “We will intimidate and we will manipulate until you capitulate.”
The response of millions of freedom-loving Americans remains the same: We’re not going to capitulate.
We will love our LGBT friends and neighbors and co-workers and family members, but we will not surrender our freedoms.
Can I hear an “Amen”?
Democrats wasting all those Gay Points they have in the Gay Bank ,LOL
Amen!!
...”...Gamers..For Equality”
Im betting that one...lives in his mommies basement!!
AMEN AND AMEN
Yes, and as the article points out about “fighting back” ... we’re going to continue to fight back!!
Well, to tell you what I’ve thought about this legislation, all along, is that it’s the “gay issue” that brought it out ... BUT ... it’s not JUST about gays, but preventing Christian business owners from being forced into do several things that they consider to be VIOLATIONS of deeply-held religious convictions!
I posted elsewhere ...
— — —
To me, this kind of legislation seems to have a lot more to do with OTHER THINGS, other than gays. It seems that the “gay issue” is driving the discussion, but to me, that “gay issue” seems to be a minor point, as compared to ALL of what legislation guaranteeing “Christian Conscience” in business is about.
Unless I’m mistaken about what this kind of bill means, I see this bill as preserving the “conscience” of a Christian owner of a business from serving or doing business with a person who violates that “religious conscience” by who they are or what they represent or what they stand for. SO, in that sense, it is NOT TARGETED at gays, but all sorts of other things that would violate the “Christian’s conscience”!
A sampling of some other things I can think of, in which one would DENY SERVICE to people, would be a group coming in for Pizza who supports ABORTION! That would really violate a Christian’s conscience.
Or, if a Mormon church group came in and had an “after church Pizza gathering” some Sunday afternoon. I would DENY THEM SERVICE as they are one of the largest CULT GROUPS in America ... and as far as I’m concerned Mormons shouldn’t get service from ANY CHRISTIAN BUSINESS WHATSOEVER, ANYWHERE!!
If Mitt Romney were to come in to that Pizza place he SHOULD BE DENIED SERVICE because of clearly being a Mormon!
I would DENY SERVICE to GLENN BECK, too, for his Mormonism!
SO ... it doesn’t appear to be a “gay issue” but a VERY REAL “Religious Conscience” issue and opens the door to CHRISTIAN BUSINESS to serving Christians and not VIOLATING their religious conscience!
The dummies are verging on full panic mode, they will strike at anything.
Would it be a crime to bake a couple of gay guys an Ex-Lax wedding cake? It would surely show them the true purpose of their backsides.
Where is all this discrimination taking place? Largely in their fetid imaginations and carefully planned take downs of religious business people. Mostly they’re just glorying in their dominance an time at center stage. The progressive political establishment is along for the ride, weakening and demolishing the First Amendment. The time will come where I could go to jail for what I’ve just said. Blasphemy.
![](http://s21.postimg.org/ubg59x5fb/IGGNANCE.jpg"/)
“The religious community, of course is the last institution standing against what the LGBT community wants. The church has been specifically targeted. Rather than live with accommodation, the LGBT community now seeks to use the force of government to control religious opposition to their desires.”
That is it exactly. They are “unconstitutionally” using the force of federal law to force everyone to fully accommodate to their lifestyle. They want to FORCE religious conservatives (beliefs that predate our republic) to either “participate” (even if indirectly) in homosexual activities (like catering a homosexual event) or be put out of business. It is just a matter of time when this will not be enough...they will want anyone who speaks out against homosexual practices to be prosecuted....that is where this is heading.
They see a perfect opportunity to suppress Christianity.
that’s kind of the impression I got as well, it’s bordering on foaming at the mouth hysteria
All right, folks, here’s what I came up with today. The left is telegraphing the 2016 national campaign strategy. Remember the “war on women” meme from 2012? Yep, this is it. Not so much “war on gays” as it is “Republicans are evil bigots.” My feelings about the homo-fascist agenda aside, which I have posted elsewhere in the past few days, here are the tactical and strategic reasons for the left’s new offensive:
1. This is to set the meme for 2016, as already noted. The way it’s so apparent is in the obvious hypocrisy of the left. 0bama decried this legislation but voted for the same legislation in Illinois as a state senator. Connecticut forbid it’s college coaches from attending the Final Four, but has the same law on the books. Bill Clinton (Hillary’s HINO) signed similar legislation into language while President. No mention of any of these things in the uproar. The convenient lack of objectivity shows it’s to serve a political purpose to create a public perception against GOP candidates, just like they did in 2012.
2. The public destruction of Governor Pence was a warning shot intended to shape the GOP Presidential field. They have clearly targeted Pence, and done him great damage on the national level. Pence made a number of tactical errors and generally bungled his public handling of the entire issue. But the lesson is clear and intended to do more than just eliminate a conservative GOP candidate. It was both practice in destroying the rest of them, and warning that the GOP select a candidate “from the center.” Another Romney.
3. Finally, the uproar was specifically fueled by the collaborative “gay” churches, like the Episcopalians, and directed at the rest. You will notice that the Baptists called for a repeal of the law and the Disciples of Christ cancelled their 2017 convention scheduled for Indianapolis. The strategic goal, more or less as a byproduct of the political goal, is the final cultural victory over religion and the Word of God. Having caved on this issue, it will give all the leverage necessary for the main denominations to recognize homosexual “marriage.” That will happen in the next five years, one denomination at a time.
And yes, all that other fascist stuff about exterminating freedom of conscience applies too.
Indeed. It’s all kinda crazy.
Homosexuality is a behavior. It is an action. A male cannot be a homosexual until he willingly puts his penis into another male’s mouth or anal canal, or willingly allows another male to put his penis in his mouth or anal canal.
I love my male friends, but I have no desire to engage in homosexual behavior with them. It is the act that defines homosexuality. How hard is that to understand?
Oh, that’s right, it’s a useful political issue.
Agree with every word
I haven't decided whom I prefer in the GOP presidential primary, but this incident has convinced me to eliminate Pence from consideration. If Pence can't stand up to this pressure, then he won't be able to stand up to the enormous pressure he'd face as president.
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.