Clear History: Political Intimidation vs. Faith in Jesus

Clear History: Political Intimidation vs. Faith in Jesus

keyoldAh sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters: they have forsaken the Lord, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward. Hear the word of the Lord, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah. ~Isaiah 1:4,10

Christian Man Asks Thirteen Gay Bakeries To Bake Him Pro-Traditional Marriage Cake, And Is Denied Service By All Of Them

By Theodore Shoebat

Say that “Bestiality Is Wrong” or “Polygamy Is Wrong” and it’s not considered hate speech, but if you have the opinion that “Gay Marriage Is Wrong” the whole world jumps up and down screaming “racism” “bigotry” and “hatred”.

This is becoming the politically-correct norm, but no matter what one argues, this is suppressing free speech.

freedomofspeechNo one targeted pro-gay bakeries, but gay activists target Christian bakeries. “Support Gay Marriage” is one Christian bakery was sued for refusing to put that slogan on a cake for an event to support the gay agenda. Yet Christian bakeries that refuse to make pro-homosexual marriage cakes are getting sued left, right, and center.  They get fined, they get death threats, and they lose their businesses. This experiment proves beyond doubt that the gay agenda is not just about their freedom to practice a sexual orientation, but the suppression of free speech.

Read more about the Christian man asking 13 gay bakeries to make a cake supporting traditional marriage


It doesn’t matter who loves who, UNTIL. . .

PC-TruthRush Limbaugh

RUSH: Another favorite trick in all of this: “Why are you so upset just because of who people love?” You’ve seen that phrase bandied about in this. “It’s discriminatory to care about who people love, and love is a great thing. Why are you objecting to it?” Well, I can tell you right now, I could mention I love somebody, and it wouldn’t be accepted. I would be called a bigot and any number of other bad names. All I would have to do is say, “I love, Jesus Christ.”

That is not permitted.

That makes you a bigot and whatever else, because that’s what the left is scared to death of. All of this, every bit of this is about the left’s visceral fear of religion. So the next time you get caught up in this argument and they accuse you of being a bigot or a discriminator because, “What’s wrong with this? What’s it matter who loves who?” say, “Yeah, you know, I love Jesus Christ,” and that’s like — oh, my! — showing Dracula the cross.

Twitter Bombs: Science of Smear and Intimidation to close down small businesses


millennials-twitterThe fact is, they are a handful of malcontents who despise capitalism. I know this from experience: local advertisers on an EIB affiliate in, say, Oshkosh will get inundated with complaint emails and tweets from people: “We’re never going to shop at your store again unless you stop advertising on that station.” Our investigation discovered that it’s ten, maybe 12 people who make themselves appear to be 500,000 or more. We found out that in most cases, the complaint emails come from out of state, and not from legitimate customers.


Religious Freedom Restoration Act—1993

“A federal RFRA signed by President Clinton in 1993 shares language with Indiana and other states’ bills, prohibiting the government from ‘substantially burdening’ individuals’ exercise of religion unless it is for a ‘compelling government interest’ and is doing so in the least restrictive means.”

Sixteen additional states have introduced similar “legislation this year regarding the creation of, or alteration to, a state religious freedom law. Currently, 19 states have Religious Freedom Restoration Acts (RFRAs).”

When Barack Obama was an Illinois state senator, he voted “for a version of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. It passed the Illinois Senate 56-0 and became law on July 1, 1998.” So why all the same-sex angst over Indiana’s law?



The Hobby Lobby Case

AbortionRU486PIXRUSH: Does anybody remember what Hobby Lobby was about? Would you tell me? I want to see if you do remember. What the Hobby Lobby was all about was, Hobby Lobby is owned and run and operated by Christians and they do not believe in abortion, and Obamacare was mandating that they pay for abortifacients for their employees. In other words, Obamacare was mandating the people at Hobby Lobby pay their female employees for the ability to induce abortion.

And they said: We’re not gonna do it. If you want to have an abortion, pay for it yourself.

So the Regime jumped right on ’em and said, “What do you mean? The law is the law. To hell with your religion. The law is the law. And if your female employees or anybody want to induce an abortion, you gotta make it available in your health care,” and Hobby Lobby won the case at the Supreme Court. And what she’s saying here, we realized when that started happening, we don’t have the same kind of protections in Indiana. We wanted to double down on ’em.


All that everybody recognizes here is that religious people in this country are being ganged up on. There’s no denying that, because they are a majority, and, as such, they’re automatically considered to be oppressors.

RUSH: Exactly. Exactly what I told you yesterday, exactly why these people are the enemy. They are the majority, and majorities, when the liberals are not in them, are unjust and they’re immoral and they’re not to be permitted. They are to be destroyed. When the left is not in the majority that everybody’s talking about, that majority is automatically an oppressor, it discriminates, it’s mean-spirited, it’s radical, it’s extreme, it’s all these things. And so he’s saying to the lieutenant governor, “Well, peyote, Native Americans.” The fact that they were a minority had nothing to do with peyote being exempted from the law.

Indiana Story Is About Political Intimidation, Not Love

WarOnChristianityI don’t think there’s any question that militants like this, they are bullies, and they attempt to gain victory via intimidation, and they’re trying to intimidate anybody who might stand up and oppose them. That’s exactly how it works. As I mentioned earlier in the busy broadcast today, let’s go look at the case in New Mexico where we had a photographer, a lady owns a little photography store, and in walks a gay couple wanting her to photograph their wedding.

She says no. My religion opposes gay marriage, and it would be immoral for me. So they go to the news media, they make a news story out of it, lawsuits left and right, intimidate this poor woman, she’s the worst example of living, breathing bigotry that there is, and they end up putting her out of business. The way that happened was, her existing clientele were frightened into staying away. Once her store became publicly known by everybody, and once her photography shop, her studio was associated with anti-gay bigotry, and every existing customer she had saw exactly what happened to her, they said, “You know what? I don’t want these people coming after me. So I’m not gonna patronize this studio.” And she lost her customer base.

The same thing happened to a bakery, I think it was in Denver, somewhere in Colorado, same thing.

PC-feelingsThe existing clientele end up being intimidated in staying away because they think that the activists are keeping a sharp eye on anybody that goes in that store, and they could be targeted, too. So the first caller today probably would agree, yeah, that’s the only sensible thing to do, just don’t patronize these places because you’re just gonna end up being a target yourself. And that’s the objective. This kind of intimidation.

At the end of it, how can you blame the gay activists? Look, the bakery went out of business and the photography studio went out of business. All we did was ask her to photograph our wedding and they said no and they go out of business, that’s kind of justified, right? They’re bigots and they’re homophobes. But that’s not why they went out. They went out of business because everybody’s scared to death. So this law comes along to protect the scared-to-death.

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act is a shield that basically says that people like this cannot be discriminated against, cannot lose their businesses because of religious views. It’s not a weapon. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act does not give anybody the ammunition to discriminate against or otherwise be bigoted against anybody else. It’s about totally misconstrued, misreported, but that’s the name of the game.

The worst thing you can do is back away from it. I think what Pence should have done — this is just off the top of my head, and I don’t like actually doing this because it’s easy for somebody like me, not even in Indiana, to sit here and say this is what he should have done, I would do this. But this is what I would have done if I’d have been involved. I’d have gone out there and said, “You know what, you want the law changed? Fine, you know what I’m gonna do, I’m gonna rewrite this law so that it is word-for-word what Chuck Schumer wrote in 1993 and what Bill Clinton signed into law.”

RUSH: You know, I don’t know what everybody’s so hysterical about. The photographer in New Mexico… Elaine Huguenin is her name. The name of her company was Elaine Photography. She refused service for the 2007 commitment ceremony of a lesbian couple. She lost her business. They’ve got a Religious Freedom Restoration Act in New Mexico. It did not save her business. The Colorado baker was a guy named Jack Phillips. He owned the Masterpiece Bakery.

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act did not save Elaine’s company, either, nor the bakery. Neither the federal law nor the New Mexico law saved the businesses. Nor did it shield them. I don’t know why. I don’t know what everybody’s so hysterical about because the law didn’t even stop the discrimination by the militant homosexuals in this case. Anyway, I have to make these points because when stories like this hit the news, none of it is true. It’s striking, how little factual truth there is to these highly charged emotional culture related stories.

It’s about Religion, not Minorities

persecutingchristiansIt was all about their religion. It had nothing to do with the fact they’re Native Americans. And the Amish, LED, had nothing to do with the fact that they’re a minority. It was all to do with their religious belief. No different here. Christians, these people being discussed, do not believe in gay marriage. They do not believe that homosexual marriage is legit and they don’t want to be forced to have to honor it. No different than the Indians, “Hey, you can’t deny me my peyote. That’s part of my religious belief.” And Clinton signed into law praising it and praising God and all of this.

But the Left, ever-vigilant against group-based slights on behalf of favored constituencies, is only too eager to label orthodox Christians as threats to the public. This bigotry has a purpose. It serves to demonize the last significant constituency standing in the way of sexual revolution radicalism.”


Purpose of Bigotry against Christians


RUSH:”This bigotry,” the kind I just described, “has a purpose. “It serves to demonize the last significant constituency standing in the way of sexual revolution radicalism. After all, unless you demonize your opposition, the general public will have little appetite for forcing Christians to pay for abortion pills, forcing Christian groups to open up to atheist leadership,” as the Episcopal Church did, “or forcing Christian bakers or photographers to help celebrate events they find morally offensive.”


From AFA:

Opposition to Indiana law proves the need for it

In order to gain dominance in the culture, homosexual activists must diminish the influence of religion. That’s the view of a conservative talk-radio host in Indiana who supports that state’s religious freedom bill.

Indiana has taken a beating after Governor Mike Pence signed that measure into law last week, with some corporations saying they are considering a boycott of the state in response. The measure is designed to protect people of faith, but homosexual activists and their sympathizers say it legalizes discrimination against individuals because of their sexual orientation.

Peter Heck, a talk-radio host and columnist in Indiana, spoke with OneNewsNow about the ongoing controversy.

“… One of the most curious things about this is how this became a bill that legalizes discrimination,” he says. “You have all of these folks from around the nation boycotting Indiana over what is a law that basically just defends the rights of conscience and the right of association that we all hold sacred, whether we’re religious people or not.”

Fascism Today

Heck contends the loud voice against the law “if anything demonstrates the need for it.” He says “it is the reincarnation of a neo-fascist view.”PERSECUTED - In theaters July 18th.  (PRNewsFoto/One Media LLC)

You believe like me, you think like me, you endorse and embrace what I’m doing – or we will punish you, we’ll fine you, we’ll evict you through the power of the state,” he summarizes the threats of the opposition.

“That is not a direction that a free society wants to be moving in,” he concludes, “and it certainly is not a movement that you want to be associated with if you consider yourself a friend of freedom.”

Heck cites many instances of homosexuals attempting to drive Christians underground, but the new law would protect them as well as homosexuals who consider themselves people of faith. That’s why Heck says activists opposed to the law – whose spokesmen regularly call for open-mindedness and tolerance – are clearly demonstrating they are, in fact, “a sworn enemy of both.”


Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s