Why do some people recklessly repeat statements ad nauseam which are, in the end, simply not true? Because for many, the means justify the ends. Some people will believe anything if it is repeated enough, allowing proponents of claims such as those made about Mississippi’s HB 1523 to see them increasingly accepted as true. Unfortunately, this does not help our increasingly fractured society get along, but only cements intolerance toward many well-meaning Christians — who themselves would never act in such bad faith toward those who disagree with biblical truth.Since HB 1523’s challengers lost before the 5thCircuit after they were not able to show how the law injured them, they have now appealed to the Supreme Court — and have recklessly mischaracterized the circumstances surrounding this law in doing so.
Their petition opens by absurdly arguing that the religious exemptions in HB 1523 “demean” and “stigmatize” same-sex couples and deny them equal treatment under the law (ostensibly, because such exemptions allow some to withhold their approval of such conduct). In the petitioners’ view, “[t]hat is precisely the harm that Obergefell sought to rectify.”
This line of reasoning misleadingly implies that HB 1523 somehow was designed to undercut Obergefell. It wasn’t. The law simply provides exemptions for those whose consciences are implicated by Obergefell — which can be followed consistent with HB 1523; same-sex marriages are still fully treated the same by the state of Mississippi as other marriages. Just as objections to military service and abortion have long been protected in law despite fitting the petitioners’ notion of a “particular” religion (notably, the petition never really addresses these areas), the law can provide conscience exemptions in other areas too.
Nevertheless, the petitioners continue to try to condition the reader to the “goodness” of Obergefell and the nefarious nature of any religious objections to it (notwithstanding the Supreme Court’s own recognition to the contrary) — the warm sounding yet nebulous “promise” of Obergefell is discussed, HB 1523 is alleged to “repudiate central aspects of petitioners’ lives, families, and identities,” and the law is an “attempt to use religious exemptions to undermine rights to equality and dignity of LGBT people.” Even the Masterpiece case is subtly equated with “state attempts to limit Obergefell by creating unprecedented religious exemptions.”
Christians are trying to live with Obergefell, and just protect their own conscience by not being forced under penalty of law to celebrate something that is clearly contrary to scripture. Yet instead of trying to find a reasonable middle ground, opponents of HB 1523 are forging ahead and asking the Supreme Court to take this case with the help of none other than former Obama Solicitor General Donald Verilli — who famously admitted at oral argument in Obergefell that religious institutions that disagree with same-sex marriage could lose their tax-exempt status.
Those supporting HB 1523 and similar legislation might disagree with Obergefell, but they are not trying to change the ruling — they are just trying to protect themselves in the face of it. If only those who support Obergefell and disagree with HB 1523 would do the same.
Tony Perkins’ Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC senior writers.
http://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/101117_transscotus_770x400-e1507764055572.jpg362640Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2017-10-11 19:22:002017-10-11 19:22:56The Supreme Falsehoods of HB 1523 Opponents
Co-authored by two of the nation’s leading scholars on mental health and sexuality, the 143-page report discusses over 200 peer-reviewed studies in the biological, psychological, and social sciences, painstakingly documenting what scientific research shows and does not show about sexuality and gender.
The major takeaway, as the editor of the journal explains, is that “some of the most frequently heard claims about sexuality and gender are not supported by scientific evidence.”
Here are four of the report’s most important conclusions:
The belief that sexual orientation is an innate, biologically fixed human property—that people are ‘born that way’—is not supported by scientific evidence.
Likewise, the belief that gender identity is an innate, fixed human property independent of biological sex—so that a person might be a ‘man trapped in a woman’s body’ or ‘a woman trapped in a man’s body’—is not supported by scientific evidence.
Only a minority of children who express gender-atypical thoughts or behavior will continue to do so into adolescence or adulthood. There is no evidence that all such children should be encouraged to become transgender, much less subjected to hormone treatments or surgery.
Non-heterosexual and transgender people have higher rates of mental health problems (anxiety, depression, suicide), as well as behavioral and social problems (substance abuse, intimate partner violence), than the general population. Discrimination alone does not account for the entire disparity.
McHugh, whom the editor of The New Atlantis describes as “arguably the most important American psychiatrist of the last half-century,” is a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and was for 25 years the psychiatrist-in-chief at the Johns Hopkins Hospital. It was during his tenure as psychiatrist-in-chief at Johns Hopkins that he put an end to sex reassignment surgery there, after a study launched at Hopkins revealed that it didn’t have the benefits for which doctors and patients had long hoped.
Implications for Policy
The report focuses exclusively on what scientific research shows and does not show. But this science can have implications for public policy.
The report reviews rigorous research showing that ‘only a minority of children who experience cross-gender identification will continue to do so into adolescence or adulthood.’
Take, for example, our nation’s recent debates over transgender policies in schools. One of the consistent themes of the report is that science does not support the claim that “gender identity” is a fixed property independent of biological sex, but rather that a combination of biological, environmental, and experiential factors likely shape how individuals experience and express themselves when it comes to sex and gender.
The report also discusses the reality of neuroplasticity: that all of our brains can and do change throughout our lives (especially, but not only, in childhood) in response to our behavior and experiences. These changes in the brain can, in turn, influence future behavior.
This provides more reason for concern over the Obama administration’s recent transgender school policies. Beyond the privacy and safety concerns, there is thus also the potential that such policies will result in prolonged identification as transgender for students who otherwise would have naturally grown out of it.
The report reviews rigorous research showing that “only a minority of children who experience cross-gender identification will continue to do so into adolescence or adulthood.” Policymakers should be concerned with how misguided school policies might encourage students to identify as girls when they are boys, and vice versa, and might result in prolonged difficulties. As the report notes, “There is no evidence that all children who express gender-atypical thoughts or behavior should be encouraged to become transgender.”
Beyond school policies, the report raises concerns about proposed medical intervention in children. Mayer and McHugh write: “We are disturbed and alarmed by the severity and irreversibility of some interventions being publicly discussed and employed for children.”
They continue: “We are concerned by the increasing tendency toward encouraging children with gender identity issues to transition to their preferred gender through medical and then surgical procedures.” But as they note, “There is little scientific evidence for the therapeutic value of interventions that delay puberty or modify the secondary sex characteristics of adolescents.”
Findings on Transgender Issues
The same goes for social or surgical gender transitions in general. Mayer and McHugh note that the “scientific evidence summarized suggests we take a skeptical view toward the claim that sex reassignment procedures provide the hoped for benefits or resolve the underlying issues that contribute to elevated mental health risks among the transgender population.” Even after sex reassignment surgery, patients with gender dysphoria still experience poor outcomes:
Compared to the general population, adults who have undergone sex reassignment surgery continue to have a higher risk of experiencing poor mental health outcomes. One study found that, compared to controls, sex-reassigned individuals were about five times more likely to attempt suicide and about 19 times more likely to die by suicide.
Mayer and McHugh urge researchers and physicians to work to better “understand whatever factors may contribute to the high rates of suicide and other psychological and behavioral health problems among the transgender population, and to think more clearly about the treatment options that are available.” They continue:
In reviewing the scientific literature, we find that almost nothing is well understood when we seek biological explanations for what causes some individuals to state that their gender does not match their biological sex. … Better research is needed, both to identify ways by which we can help to lower the rates of poor mental health outcomes and to make possible more informed discussion about some of the nuances present in this field.
Rather than respect the diversity of opinions on sensitive and controversial health care issues, the regulations endorse and enforce one highly contested and scientifically unsupported view. As Mayer and McHugh urge, more research is needed, and physicians need to be free to practice the best medicine.
Stigma, Prejudice Don’t Explain Tragic Outcomes
The report also highlights that people who identify as LGBT face higher risks of adverse physical and mental health outcomes, such as “depression, anxiety, substance abuse, and most alarmingly, suicide.” The report summarizes some of those findings:
Members of the non-heterosexual population are estimated to have about 1.5 times higher risk of experiencing anxiety disorders than members of the heterosexual population, as well as roughly double the risk of depression, 1.5 times the risk of substance abuse, and nearly 2.5 times the risk of suicide.
Members of the transgender population are also at higher risk of a variety of mental health problems compared to members of the non-transgender population. Especially alarmingly, the rate of lifetime suicide attempts across all ages of transgender individuals is estimated at 41 percent, compared to under 5 percent in the overall U.S. population.
What accounts for these tragic outcomes? Mayer and McHugh investigate the leading theory—the “social stress model”—which proposes that “stressors like stigma and prejudice account for much of the additional suffering observed in these subpopulations.”
But they argue that the evidence suggests that this theory “does not seem to offer a complete explanation for the disparities in the outcomes.” It appears that social stigma and stress alone cannot account for the poor physical and mental health outcomes that LGBT-identified people face.
One study found that, compared to controls, sex-reassigned individuals were about five times more likely to attempt suicide and about 19 times more likely to die by suicide.
As a result, they conclude that “More research is needed to uncover the causes of the increased rates of mental health problems in the LGBT subpopulations.” And they call on all of us work to “alleviate suffering and promote human health and flourishing.”
Findings Contradict Claims in Supreme Court’s Gay Marriage Ruling
Finally, the report notes that scientific evidence does not support the claim that people are “born that way” with respect to sexual orientation. The narrative pushed by Lady Gaga and others is not supported by the science. A combination of biological, environmental, and experiential factors likely account for an individual’s sexual attractions, desires, and identity, and “there are no compelling causal biological explanations for human sexual orientation.”
Furthermore, the scientific research shows that sexual orientation is more fluid than the media suggests. The report notes that “Longitudinal studies of adolescents suggest that sexual orientation may be quite fluid over the life course for some people, with one study estimating that as many as 80 percent of male adolescents who report same-sex attractions no longer do so as adults.”
These findings—that scientific research does not support the claim that sexual orientation is innate and immutable—directly contradict claims made by Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy in last year’s Obergefell ruling. Kennedy wrote, “their immutable nature dictates that same-sex marriage is their only real path to this profound commitment” and “in more recent years have psychiatrists and others recognized that sexual orientation is both a normal expression of human sexuality and immutable.”
But the science does not show this.
While the marriage debate was about the nature of what marriage is, incorrect scientific claims about sexual orientation were consistently used in the campaign to redefine marriage.
In the end, Mayer and McHugh observe that much about sexuality and gender remains unknown. They call for honest, rigorous, and dispassionate research to help better inform public discourse and, more importantly, sound medical practice.
As this research continues, it’s important that public policy not declare scientific debates over, or rush to legally enforce and impose contested scientific theories. As Mayer and McHugh note, “Everyone—scientists and physicians, parents and teachers, lawmakers and activists—deserves access to accurate information about sexual orientation and gender identity.”
We all must work to foster a culture where such information can be rigorously pursued and everyone—whatever their convictions, and whatever their personal situation—is treated with the civility, respect, and generosity that each of us deserves.
Our society and traditional values are at a crossroads. Gender issues and the decline of marriage and family stability is threatening society.
Sensitivity and political correctness are infecting our culture and reshaping our society. Government overreach into our families, local communities, and churches threatens our ability to live productive and free lives.
That is why it is our mission to ensure you receive accurate, timely, and reliable facts impacting our society today. Culture wars dominate the news, and for good reason.
The Daily Signal gives you the facts so you can form opinions, make decisions, and stay informed. And to do that we report clear, concise, and reliable facts impacting every aspect of society today.
We are a dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts funded solely by the financial support of the general public. And we need your help!
Your financial support will help us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and ensure you have the facts you need (and can trust) to stay informed.
http://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/fake-news-1-e1485601063541.jpg360640The Daily Signalhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Signal2017-09-03 07:46:172017-09-04 07:11:30Almost Everything the Media Tell You About Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Is Wrong
John Stemberger, founder of On My Honor, Chairman of the Board of Trail Life USA, and President of the Florida Family Policy Council released the following statement in light of the Boy Scouts of America’s announcement that they would be allowing transgender boys (biological girls who want to become boys) to enroll in scouting programs:
“This is a profoundly sad but inevitable decision on the part of the Boy Scouts of America (BSA). The “key three” leadership of the BSA assured its membership less than four years ago when they voted to allow openly gay boys in the program that this would never happen. Now untold thousands of boys in Scouting will be directly exposed to the serious psychological confusion that is characterized by those claiming to be transgender. As a society, we should have great compassion for children suffering from gender dysphoria while getting them proper counseling and professional help. Instead, the BSA is encouraging and facilitating a recognized mental disorder that has far reaching consequences to the health and safety of children.
Recently, the American College of Pediatricians released a formal position paper entitled “Gender Identity Harms Children” urging those working with children ‘to reject all policies that condition children to accept as normal a life of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex.’
Further, knowing that boys and biological girls will be showering, dressing and camping in tents together creates a clear child protection issue which is being ignored. It’s simply stunning that a leading youth organization which parents entrust the protection of their children with has opted to again appease political activists rather than follow clear, common-sense best practices for child protection.”
In light of this decision, parents across America are even more grateful for Trail Life USA, the distinctly Christian scouting organization for boys and young men, which focuses on adventure, character, and leadership in its 700 troops in 48 states across the country. Trail Life CEO Mark Hancock responded to the decision by saying, “Trail Life USA is saddened to see this decision by the BSA. We assure our members and chartering organizations that we are committed to the timeless Biblical values affirmed in our Statement of Faith and Values.”
http://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/boy-scout-gay-flag-e1485860631707.jpg395640Florida Family Policy Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFlorida Family Policy Council2017-01-31 06:04:442017-01-31 06:05:49Boy Scouts of America Decides to Allow Transgendered Boys [Girls] to Enroll in Scouting Programs
For those who did not see this Channel 9 Investigative report there was a Radical Syrian Cleric, Sheikh Mohammed Rateb Al-Nabulsi, who openly calls for the death of Jews and Gays speaking in Central Florida. Sh. Al-Nabulsi found a welcoming home at the Islamic Society of Central Florida – Imam Musri’s Mosque, AlBir Mosque in Kissimmee, Islamic Society of Pinellas County Mosque, and a Embassy Suites Banquet Hall in Tampa for the American Muslim Leadership Council of Tampa, FL.
“…the wicked Jews are a collection of defects and imperfections, and a hotbed of vices and evils. They are the worst enemies of God, against Islam and its people, The Almighty says: Certainly you will find the most violent of people in enmity for those who believe (to be) the Jews and those who are polytheists. [Quran 5:82]”
Sh. Nabulsi goes on,
“It is not permissible under Sharia to relinquish to the Jews any part of the lands of the Muslims nor to make peace with them, for they are the people of cunning and deception, and the breaking of pacts.
All the Jewish people are combatant…this is essentially an entirely aggressive entity from A to Z. This is the Sharia ruling, This is what many of the Ulema say, the Sharia ruling on Fedayeen activity is that it is permissible. “
Sheikh Al-Nabulsi has never retracted his statements publicly. These statements of hatred for all the Jewish people from A to Z, is part of his schadenfreude or worldview. In the Muslim world, Sh. Al-Nabulsi is a world renowned Islamic scholar and those who support him must also, by default, share his hate filled worldview.
Imam Mohammad Musri on January 7, 2014 invited this Hate Sheikh into his Mosque. Imam Mursri was interviewed by Channel 9 reporter Field Sutton on why he would invite such a controversial figure to his Orlando, FL Mosque. Imam Musri did not condemn his friend Al-Nabulsi’s hate speech against the Jews. In fact, Musri ignored those anti Jewish comments thinking Mr. Sutton was referring only to Sh. Al-Nabulsi’s anti gay remarks.
Imam Musri’s answers appeared to only reference Sh. Al-Nabulsi’s video saying that, “All homosexuals deserve the death penalty” not addressing any of the hate Sheikh’s Anti Jewish comments. Imam Musri said, “We would not welcome any person or organization that will bash any group,” Musri said, “after the Pulse nightclub attack, he hopes the visiting scholar no longer feels the way he used to feel. “If he does, then it gives us the opportunity to discuss and maybe challenge those views and maybe change minds or hearts,” I’m sorry to tell you this Imam Musri, but any reasonable person would want that little detail of calling for the murder of an entire demographic cleared up before inviting him to speak at your Mosque, instead of giving the Hate Sheikh a clever pass. Imam Musri – I find your cavalier attitude towards your brother Al-Nabulsi’s hate speech and incitement to violence pathologically disturbing.
Imam Musri’s refusing to condemn Al-Nabulsi’s hate speech against the Jews specifically, creates a dilemma for many in the Orlando Jewish leadership.
For example, Imam Musri co-hosts a interfaith radio show on National Public Radio with Rabbi Steven Engel of the Congregation of Reform Judaism in Orlando. Rabbi Engel must decide if his personal friendship with Imam Musri is more important than his association with a radical Syrian cleric who says all Jews are legitimate targets for martyrdom operations and death. Imam Musri had the opportunity to condemn Sh. Al-Nabulsi on Channel 9 News but never did, one must ask why? Rabbi Steven Engel and his congregation must ask why?
The afternoon of Sh. Al-Nabulsi’s lecture at Imam Musri’s Mosque we went to ask that exact question, but never got the chance. Before entering the Mosque, we were confronted by Bassem Chaaban, Director of Outreach for Imam Musri’s Mosque. Mr. Chaaban told us, “This is a private event and not open to the public…it was not advertised to the public and for our members only.” We were denied entry and asked to leave.
Nowhere on Imam Musri’s flyer for the Hate Sheikh event does it say ‘Private’ or RSVP required. The Al-Nabulsi lecture was advertised on the ISCF Facebook page. Clearly Mr. Chaaban, acting on Imam Musri’s behalf, only wanted Muslim’s in attendance, all others not welcome.
Hate Sheikh’s Anti Gay Comments
Sh. Al-Nabulsi said on video tape that, “All homosexuals deserve the death penalty.” The only person from Orlando’s gay community who publicly condemned Al-Nabulsi was Randy Ross, the Orange County leader for President Donald Trump’s election campaign.
How deep does the hate and intolerance run in the Central Florida Muslim community? There are three Mosques and the American Muslim Leadership Council of Tampa who hold Sh. ‘Hate’ Al-Nabulsi in such high regard they invited him to speak, knowing his visceral hatred for Jews and Gays.
Imam Musri was the voice of the Orlando Muslim community after the Pulse Nightclub terrorist attack. Imam Musri spoke a message of love, togetherness, and that Islam had nothing to do with the attack by ISIS Jihadi, Omar Mateen.
Imam Musri did an interview next to the Pulse Nightclub with Tim Vargas, local gay leader, and George Stephanopoulos. Imam Musri was saying how the Pulse Nightclub shooter did not represent Islam and how the Muslim community stands with the Gay community and the entire Orlando community at large. That was a good and much needed message, only now we learn Imam Musri was not telling the truth. If Imam Musri was truthful in his interview with George Stephanopoulos, today he would have condemned Sheikh Al-Nabulsi publicly for his call to murder gays and Jews. Imam Musri invited a hate cleric to his Mosque as an honored guest for his thousands of Muslim congregants, now he must account for his actions.
This is serious business because Imam Musri is well respected in the Jewish, Christian, Gay, and interfaith communities. Imam Musri has built these relationships over many years telling these local leaders exactly what they need to hear to build bridges of friendship.
Then while Imam Musri thinks nobody is looking, he shows what lies underneath his slick polished veneer. Underneath that veneer of bridge building lies a man who reveres an Islamic scholar who calls for the murder of Jews and Gays. Imam Musri had the opportunity to set the record straight condemning Al-Nabulsi with Channel 9 News reporter Field Sutton, but he did not.
How many followers of Islam in Central Florida who went to hear the Hate Sheikh speak agree with his views on the killing of Jews and Gays?
How many people who hear Sheikh Mohammed Rateb Al-Nabulsi’s incitement to violence against Jews and Gays will act upon it? In light of the Pulse nightclub terrorist attack, Ft. Lauderdale airport attack, San Bernardino attack, Ft. Hood terrorist attack, bomb scares to 3 Jewish facilities in Orlando, this question can no longer be ignored.
http://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Sheikh-Mohammed-Rateb-Al-Nabulsi.jpg350640Alan Kornmanhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngAlan Kornman2017-01-12 09:22:062017-01-12 09:25:31Radical Syrian Cleric Comes To Central Florida Preaching Hate
In an unprecedented move, an Oregon judge has allowed a so-called “transgender” man to legally change his sex from female (he had previously been allowed to choose female) to “non-binary.” It’s newsworthy enough to have made it to Drudge, but even that fact doesn’t do justice to the grave threat presented by Multnomah County Circuit Court Judge Amy Holmes Hehn’s ruling.
I’ll cut to the chase. Even if you accept the legitimacy of “transgender” status (more on this later), here’s what must be understood:
Psychologists and transgender activists do not say “sex” and “gender” are synonymous.
Rather, they often take pains to point out — sometimes quite dogmatically — that “sex” is a biological distinction while “gender” is a psychological one. As MedicalNewsToday.com wrote in March, “In general terms, ‘sex’ refers to the biological differences between males and females, such as the genitalia and genetic differences. ‘Gender’ is more difficult to define but can refer to the role of a male or female in society (gender role), or an individual’s concept of themselves (gender identity).” You can find essentially the same definitions at Monash University’s website and numerous other places.
Even the man who petitioned Judge Hehn for the “sex change,” a fellow going by the name “Jamie” Shupe, has in so many words acknowledged the above. As The Oregonianreports, “I was assigned male at birth due to biology,” Shupe said. “I’m stuck with that for life. My gender identity is definitely feminine.”
Judge Hehn is clearly operating far above her pay grade. Like most people, she apparently views “gender” as a synonym for “sex,” oblivious to the evolution (or devolution) of the term and concept.
Up until relatively recently, “gender” was mainly used in grammar, pertaining to the categories into which words are divided, such as masculine, feminine and neuter. It was not traditionally used in reference to people.
This started to change with the now discredited quack psychologist Dr. John Money. In 1966, he originated the debunked “gender neutrality” theory and appears to have been the first person to popularize the application of “gender” to people. Even so, such usage of the term didn’t really catch on until the last 20 or 25 years.
And what was the purpose of this language manipulation? You couldn’t convince people many decades ago that there were more than two sexes, because that there are only two was rightly cemented in their minds. The biological distinction was the only thing people conceptualized and accepted. But “gender” was the perfect term as it included more than two categories: masculine, feminine and neuter. And thus did we see an attempt at the 1995 Conference on Women in Beijing to adopt language stating that a family could comprise up to five “genders”: male heterosexual, female heterosexual, homosexual, lesbian and bisexual (the attempt failed owing to Vatican opposition). Of course, that’s now old hat — the shape-shifting libertines now define scores of “genders.”
But no matter. Once the term caught on and most everyone accepted that a person could have “gender” — and once a minority had accepted that there could be more than two — the next step was to add to the concept the notion that a person could be “transgender” and transition from one to another. It’s incrementalism; step by step, inch by inch.
And now that even more people have accepted the fluidity of “gender” and virtually everyone confuses the term with “sex,” we’re witnessing the next step: the attempt to eliminate the concept of the biological distinction itself. The idea is that there will only be “gender,” and “sex” will just be a term describing what you do with a sentient biped (in most cases) who, hopefully, won’t transition in the middle of the act.
So first was just the correct concept of “sex” (biological), then the introduction of a new concept, “gender” (perception of what a person is). Then there was the confusion of the two terms attended by the expansion of the new concept and advent of another new concept, “transgender.” Now, with the terms long viewed as synonyms, we’re seeing the attempted elimination of the concept of “sex.” And just as the man on the street mindlessly adopted the term “gender,” expect to see a concerted effort to eliminate the term “sex’s” use in the legal realm.
And the proof is in the pudding. Note that among the more than 60 “genders” now imagined by the sexual revolutionaries is “cisgender,” whose definition is, “denoting or relating to a person whose self-identity conforms with the gender that corresponds to their [sic] biological sex; not transgender.” In other words, normality is now listed as just one of scores of flavors of the day along with abnormality. In this way of “thinking,” it’s no better to be a normal woman than a cross-dresser masquerading as a woman. So the first step was to try to normalize the abnormal, and now the effort is on to “denormalize” the normal.
Do you now see why I and a few others warned, for years and years and years and years, that we shouldn’t use the word “gender” in reference to people or embrace any aspect of the Lexicon of the Left? The side that defines the vocabulary of a debate wins the debate.
As for Judge Hehn, I doubt she’s sophisticated enough to understand any of the above. She likely was just operating on misconceptions and emotion. But as former “transsexual” Alan Finch said in 2004, “You fundamentally can’t change sex. … Transsexualism was invented by psychiatrists.” No, you can’t change sex. You don’t have “gender” unless you’re a word. And you shouldn’t be able to change sex in legal documents, either. You are what you are.
Judge Hehn’s ridiculous, destructive ruling should be overturned if possible, and she should be removed from the bench. Judges who can’t separate fact from fiction, emotion from reason or, even, boys from girls, need to be playing with blocks, not with our laws.
Hersheypark has released a statement saying they will allow guests and employees to choose their restroom preference based on how they gender-identify.
Specifically, the company states: “Guests and employees may continue to use the restrooms with which they gender-identify, or are welcome to use the many family restrooms available across the destination.”
Hersheypark says it attracts millions of visitors every year, and to make sure the park remains a welcoming place it stands by its core values of respecting others and their differences.
Read more from the park below:
“Every year, the employees of Hershey Entertainment & Resorts (HE&R) welcome over 6 million guests from down the street and around the world. We recognize that the more perspectives we have within our company, the more welcoming we are to all those who visit and seek employment here. In fact, our company has four core values, one of which is “respectful of others,” which we define as treating all people with dignity, while respecting their differences and ideas.
For decades, Hersheypark has been dedicated to the safety and security of our guest and employees. It is foundational to our brand. Additionally, the Park has and will always strive to accommodate all guests and employees – including members of the LGBT community – to ensure those visiting or working at Hersheypark are comfortable and feel secure.
To that end, the park will continue its practice of treating all guests and employees the same no matter race, ethnicity, sexual identity, etc. Guests and employees may continue to use the restrooms with which they gender-identify, or are welcome to use the many family restrooms available across the destination.
ABOUT THE CHRISTIAN ACTION NETWORK
Christian Action Network (CAN) was founded in 1990 by Martin Mawyer. Based in Lynchburg, Virginia, the group is a public advocacy and education organization based on biblical principles, values, traditions and American ideals. Its primary goals are to protect America’s religious and moral heritage through educational efforts.
CAN accomplishes its education work through direct-mail campaigns aimed at impacting public policy, along with public speaking engagements, documentary films, radio and TV interviews, books, and alliances with other organizations to impact change. Learn more by clicking here.
Former commander of America’s elite Delta Force, Lieutenant General Jerry Boykin, received news from Hampden-Sydney College that he was being terminated because of comments he made concerning Obama’s demands that schools should comply with the new bathroom laws that basically render restrooms and locker rooms genderless.
According to a World Net Daily article, Boykin voiced his disapproval of bills that would allow men to go into women’s toilets, locker rooms and showers. The article quotes Boykin,
“When I said in Orlando that ‘… the first man who goes in the restroom with my daughter will not have to worry about surgery,’ the LGBT community once again came after me, claiming that I was calling for violence against #transgender people.”
Of course the militant LGBT community jumped all over his comment, claiming the distinguished military hero to have called for violence against transgender people. They demanded Boykin’s job be terminated through emails, phone calls, and social media.
“I was referring to perverts who will use these policies to get into locker rooms with girls and women, and I object to that,”
“Nonetheless, I gave the LGBT community just what they needed to pressure the college leadership to terminate me and they did.”
Hampden-Sydney is one of the few all-male schools left in the country and has a rich history as Patrick Henry and James Madison were some of its first trustees. According to its website, the institution for higher learning has this as part of their mission: to form good men and good citizens in an atmosphere of sound learning.
The plaque at the front gate says:
“Come here as youths so that you may leave as men.”
And says this in its honor code:
“The Hampden-Sydney student will behave as a gentleman at all times and in all places.”
And yet those in leadership positions of the college who are responsible for firing a military hero should be mirroring what they propose to teach. Instead they act like a bunch of wimps, and do more harm to those young boys at the school who may actually believe that the college is there to train real men.
What they taught all the boys at that school is not to stand on principle, but to go with what will please the whining crowd of special interest groups. Moreover, those who decided to terminate Boykin have displayed a disregard for societal norms that are necessary to a moral civilization.
What could be more chivalrous or gentlemanly than to stand up for women and children who have and undoubtedly will suffer sexual assault due to an idiotic bathroom law that defies common sense. This is the intention of General Boykin… to protect women and children.
Hampden-Sydney’s intention is to run and hide from any confrontation with a bunch of men and women who are confused about their own sexual identity, and desire for the rest of the world to climb on board and celebrate their confusion.
The all-male college just neutered themselves in front of the whole country by proving that they no longer stand for the principles on which they were founded. Hampden-Sydney is nothing more than buildings filled with boys who will be searching for examples of real men, you know, the kind that: stand for what is right, fight the enemy head-on, don’t back down from confrontation, and know how to protect women and children.
The school has now lost an authentic man, professor, warrior, and Christian example. Hampden-Sydney will now be celebrated as a bastion for the LBGT crowd, but the students will be the losers.
http://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/jerry-boykin-hampden-sydney-college.jpg375651Suzanne Shattuckhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngSuzanne Shattuck2016-05-19 06:13:352016-05-21 05:16:23College Fires Retired Army General Over Protecting Daughter in Transgender Bathroom Comment
In a recent letter to the WSJ Editor (at this date unpublished) David A. Kallman, Sr. Counsel for the Great Lakes Justice Center in Lansing, Michigan, wrote:
In the controversy over bathrooms/LGBT “rights,” it is curious that companies like Dow Chemical, Alcoa and Monsanto have chosen sides (WSJ 4/18/16), along with Disney, the NBA and NFL…The hysteria and lies from opponents of Religious Freedom Restoration Acts are outrageous….They claim “RFRA is a license to discriminate.”…. RFRA is not a “license” to do anything. It is merely a defense against attempted infringement of religious rights. The bi-partisan Federal RFRA, co-sponsored by Senators Kennedy and Schumer, was supported by numerous liberal and conservative organizations, including the ACLU, American Jewish Committee, National Association of Evangelicals, Baptist Joint Committee, and National Council of Churches.
In the transgender bathroom “rights” controversy, much is at stake….No tolerance exists for anyone who disagrees with “their truth.” Must we all praise a 40 year old cross-dressing man using the women’s’ bathroom as a hero for justice while condemning a teenage girl as a hateful bigot for simply wanting her privacy and safety protected? You decide.
William Wagner, former Federal Magistrate Judge and Constitutional Law Professor, stated: “All states prohibit criminal sexual conduct, e.g., indecent exposure. No civil law purporting to allow such criminal activity protects a perpetrator from prosecution.” Yet, the moral high ground (funnily enough) is claimed by toxic polluters, Dow , Monsanto, and Alcoa. Disney’s employment of child molesters competes with the NBA and NFL’snasty habit of shielding million-dollar brawny players who beat up women and cheat on child support. The safety of women and children is clearly not the priority of such misogynist bureaucrats. So whose tune are they dancing to? And why? As to the reality of alleged “transgender” persons, lawyers defending the woman suing Planet Fitness did a quick search:
SAN BERNARDINO CO., CA (2013) – A 46- year-old man cross-dressed as a woman to gain access to a women’s dormitory and other female only facilities to take pictures of women with a cell phone hidden in his purse.
OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON (2012) – A 45- year-old man, who self-identified as a woman, used all of the woman’s facilities at the Evergreen State College swimming pool. He exposed himself to minor girls from the local area who would use the college’s swimming pool.
PORTLAND, OREGON (2011) – A convicted sex offender for offenses against children claimed to be a transgender woman and wore a dress to access areas where young girls would change, such as locker rooms and swimming pools.
TORONTO, CANADA (2014) – A man claimed to be transgender to stay at a women’s shelter where he then assaulted several women.
PALMDALE, CALIFORNIA (2013) – A 33- year-old man was charged after allegedly dressing as a woman to secretly videotape women using the restroom at Macy’s.
COLUMBUS, OHIO (2014) – A man was claiming to be a woman to use a cell phone to take pictures of women using the restroom.
EVERETT, WASHINGTON (2012) – A nontransgender man wore a bra and wig to gain entry to a women’s bathroom at a local community college to take pictures and admitted to using the women’s showers for sexual gratification.
BIRMINGHAM, ENGLAND (2011) – A student wore a mask and wig to gain entry to a women’s bathroom to spy on women and make recordings of a sexual nature.
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA (2010) – A man twice disguised himself as a woman to gain access to the showers of a U.C. Berkeley locker room to take pictures of women.
Instances of cross-dressing men invading women’s privacy illustrates how such obscene conduct threatens the survival instincts of girls and women—normal, real men know this and will protect women and girls at all cost. At this time, the rates of rape of college girls and women in “higher” education is shocking! It is just such mean spirited men who eventually run major businesses, sports groups, banks, entertainers and politicians, demand that females receive all male sociopaths who “feel” they are women. (right, http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2014/10/7/report-sexual-offense-high) Really?!
http://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/misogyny-Google-Search-e1462018866595.png404640Dr. Judith Reismanhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Judith Reisman2016-04-30 08:28:502017-08-04 05:53:39Trangenderism -- The Hatred of Women Writ Large
Since the announcement by Target that it will allow men to use women’s bathrooms there have been arrests of men secretly filming women. This is the cheap way to make pornographic films, all at the expense of Target customers. Customers violated include women and underage children.
Ashley Lahue from KMOV TV in St. Louis on April 27th reported, “An O’Fallon, Missouri man was arrested on April 23, 2015 after allegedly secretly filming women in a Target dressing room. Matthew Foerstel, 26, faces felony charges for invasion of privacy in the second degree and unlawful possession of a firearm.”
The same is happening on college and university campuses.
Project Veritas did a video expose of a University of North Carolina, Ashville official allowing a man, who self identifies as a sexual predator, to use the women’s bathroom:
Several states, including North Carolina, have restricted access to public bathrooms based upon a person’s birth gender. Most recently a Florida School District has done the same. The Liberty Council reports:
Effective this morning, the Marion County School Board affirmed the constitutional expectation of its student’s privacy by requiring students to use the bathrooms and other facilities based on biological sex, as requested by Liberty Counsel. This 4-1 vote happened late last night. It will allow students of only one gender, that of their birth, into a bathroom or locker room.
Liberty Counsel represented Harrell “Hal” Phillips before the Marion County School Board in support of this commonsense bathroom policy. Phillips and his son are devout Christians who believe strongly in both biblical modesty and constitutional privacy. Last week, Phillips’ son was extremely upset when he encountered a female student in the boy’s bathroom at his high school, Vanguard High School in Ocala, FL. This was a place where he has a reasonable expectation that he will not encounter the opposite sex. Liberty Counsel also offered to defend the school board for free if the board is sued for adopting this policy.
The U.S. Constitution establishes a protection of the privacy of Americans, and our public school students do not give that up when they enter a public school bathroom. This policy protects the privacy rights and safety of all Marion County students. The four board members who voted to approve the policy should be commended for their common sense and courage in the face of threats and intimidation by the ACLU and its allies.
It also appears that Florida is considering a bill similar to that passed by the North Carolina legislature. Pedro Gonzales from The American Thinker reports, “Florida is considering a law which would require men to use men’s bathrooms and women to use women’s bathrooms, and not let them pick and choose.
It seems the majority of U.S companies have suddenly gone berserk, hotly defending the “right” of men to use female restrooms.
But are we to believe all their employees have obediently embraced homosexuality and gender-bending, and are also eager to deny the religious liberties of those who don’t?
Are so-called “LGBT” behaviors being welcomed with open arms by Joe and Jane American Worker at Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Coca-Cola, Target, PayPal, Apple, Delta Airlines, American Airlines, Time-Warner, Marriott, Hilton, Kellogg, First Data, Amazon and SalesForce? How about the NFL, NCAA and ESPN?
In fact, within these companies there may be revolution brewing. People are fed up with management’s blatant support of harmful, depraved lifestyles that apparently compel people to spitefully and deliberately discriminate against faithful Christians.
Last week, I heard from a woman who contacted me after reading my articles. She has quite a story to tell about being fired from her counseling position by a lesbian supervisor. Her termination wasn’t even related to a dispute about homosexuality, but simply because she was known to be a Christian with a desire to sometimes pray with counseling clients, with their consent.
President Obama has signed an Executive Order (EO) banning the use of the word “bathroom.” Starting May 1st, 2016 all federal agencies and federal employees will now use the word “outhouse.”
In a press release the White House Office of the Press Secretary states:
President Obama is concerned that the transgender (i.e. gender confused) community will not be able to use bathrooms in states such as North Carolina. He has therefore in the name of inclusiveness required all federal agencies to use the word outhouse when referring to places where people relieve themselves.
Outhouse is gender neutral and best describes how the LGBT community has struggled to ‘come out.’
The president believes that this is an important issue for all Americans, more so than fighting the Islamic State, the economy, jobs and the growing national debt.
Speaking of the national debt, the President has put $75 million into his FY 2017 budget to replace men’s and women’s restroom signs with the new gender neutral outhouse signs in all federal facilities. It is expected that the Republican congress will pass the president’s budget, raising the debt ceiling to cover this expense.
When asked by this reporter what impact this EO will have on the White House, Press Secretary Josh Earnest replied:
“We will now be calling the White House the Out House, for obvious reasons.”
LGBT Spokesman, and former star of Star Trek, George Takei noted, “Those of us who have ‘come out’ fully embrace President Obama’s decision. As the first gay president, we find the work he has done to embrace the LGBT community stimulating, no pun intended. For those of us who are gender confused we will visit the Out House and thank President Obama personally.”
Hillary Clinton at a campaign stop said, “I look forward to occupying the Out House on January 20th, 2017. Bill, the first black president, and I know how to put America back on track using our gender neutral policies. We are LGBT proud of what the president has done!”
Secretary of the Navy Raymond Edward “Ray” Mabus states in a letter to all Navy personnel:
The U.S. Navy has a long tradition and its own unique terminology.
The ‘head’ aboard a Navy ship is the bathroom. The term comes from the days of sailing ships when the place for the crew to relieve themselves was all the way forward on either side of the bowsprit, the integral part of the hull to which the figurehead was fastened.
With President Obama’s new Executive Order all Navy personnel will stop using ‘head’ and begin using outhouse.
All Navy outhouses will be at the tail, not the head, of our ships, no pun intended.
The Islamic State has created an outhouse for Muslims only (pictured right). Homosexuals, transgenders and the gender confused are forbidden from entering a Muslim outhouse.
An Islamic State spokesman notes:
The Quran specifically forbids sodomy, unless a Muslim is sodomizing a non-Muslim. We reject the infidel President Obama’s effort to create outhouses that are for the gender confused. This is against Islamic law. Mohammed, may peace be upon him, would condemn this as blasphemy against Allah.
If a homosexual, transgender or gender confused person is caught in a Muslim outhouse the punishment is death by throwing them off the roof of the highest building and then stoning them once they hit the ground. Allah Akbar!
The Donald Trump campaign responded to this executive overreach in a short statement:
Americans are not gender confused, if anything Americans are gender realists who embrace science, biology and genetics.
It’s time to cleanup the Out House and Make America Great Again, where men are men and women are women.
EDITORS NOTE: This political satireoriginally appeared in the Bed, Bath and Beyond Gender magazine.
http://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/old-outhouse.jpg413640Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2016-04-25 09:30:292016-04-26 08:36:29President bans word 'bathroom', federal agencies to use gender neutral 'outhouse'
A “Louder With Crowder” exclusive, Curt Schilling gives his first interview since being fired from ESPN, giving his side of the story and pulling no punches. Schilling tweeted the following and was fired for it:
EDITORS NOTE: The interview with form ESPN commentator Curt Schilling is by Louder with Crowder.
http://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/curt-schilling-tweet-e1461406916827.jpg354640Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2016-04-23 06:22:182016-05-09 08:58:12VIDEO EXCLUSIVE: Curt Schilling Goes Off on ESPN, Islam and Transgender Bathrooms
It is always interesting to see how absurd some people become in their beliefs. Among the most absurd are those who are “gender confused.” These people may be classified as “genderphobic.”
Genderphobia may be defined as:
An overwhelming and unreasonable fear of forces that cause controversy, fragmentation, scandal, chaos or discord within the LGBTQ community, thereby disturbing homosexual peace and order, which requires immediate and brutal condemnation.
Genderphobia has led to a movement where the absurd (the quality or state of being ridiculous or wildly unreasonable) has become the norm and national public policy. Among those exhibiting Genderphobia, i.e. ridiculous and unreasonable qualities, are politicians, Hollywood stars, professors, public school teachers, parents and their children.
These people do not believe what science, biology and genetics say about gender.
We decided to compile a list of The Top Ten Absurdities to help normal (a.k.a. homophobic) people understand what they may be confronted with when meeting a gender confused (a.k.a. genderphobic) person. Here is our list:
Questioning one’s birth sex (male/female) is the new normal.
Calling someone a boy or girl is racist, bigoted and makes you a member of the Ku Klux Klan.
Tolerance is a one-way-street (its my gender confused way or the highway).
Buggery is normal and healthy behavior, procreating is evil.
I can change my sex regardless of the laws of biology, science and genetics.
By simply changing my appearance, I am the sex I am portraying.
The needs of the 2% (gays) outweigh the needs of the 98% (straights).
It is okay to become a priest or boy scout leader in order to have sex with an underage boy.
Child pornography and pornography in general are healthy.
Muslims are our friends, Christians and Jews are the enemy.
So, why is the political left so concerned about the supposed rights of homosexuals, transvestites and assorted sexual deviants?
Well, here’s why – and it’s quite simple: Leaders on the left are aware that a socialist state must be the sole arbiter of morality. It must be able to decree absolutely anything and establish any social convention it deems appropriate, including that which many in any given social order would consider profoundly amoral or primally repellant.
Ayn Rand, the Russian born American writer and novelist, wrote:
The uncontested absurdities of today are the accepted slogans of tomorrow. They come to be accepted by degrees, by dint of constant pressure on one side and constant retreat on the other – until one day when they are suddenly declared to be the country’s official ideology.
Since the 1950s we have seen the absurd become America’s official ideology.
EDITORS NOTE: If you have other “gender confused” absurdities please add them in the comments section below. We will be posting other Top Ten Absurdities lists. If you have any areas of interest please note them in the comments section.
http://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/top-ten-absurdities.jpg349639Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2016-04-17 08:56:422016-04-20 16:45:21The 'Top Ten Absurdities' of the Gender Confused/Genderphobic
It appears that Democrats, particularly New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and Mayor of New York City Bill De Blasio, are gender confused. They appear to want New Yorkers to believe the absurd.
Ayn Rand wrote;
The uncontested absurdities of today are the accepted slogans of tomorrow. They come to be accepted by degrees, by dint of constant pressure on one side and constant retreat on the other – until one day when they are suddenly declared to be the country’s official ideology.
The grand absurdity of the 20th Century is that we may be biologically someone other than who we are at birth. It is the absurd notion that a male (man) or female (woman) can chose what sex they are simply by ignoring anatomy, biology and genetics.
In an attempt to make this absurdity the “official ideology” of the City and State of New York requires putting constant pressure on those who believe otherwise.
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) banned all non-essential travel to Mississippi in an executive order after the Magnolia State passed a religious liberty bill that he described as “hateful injustice against the LGBT community.”
It appears that Governor Cuomo is confused about the gender identity of some New York citizens and has imposed a travel ban to Mississippi because HB 1523 states:
The sincerely held religious beliefs or moral convictions protected by this act are the belief or conviction that:
(a) Marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman;
(b) Sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage; and
(c) Male (man) or female (woman) refer to an individual’s immutable biological sex as objectively determined by anatomy and genetics at time of birth.
When Cuomo used the words “hateful injustice” he is referring to political correctness. Cuomo, like the Democratic Party, are all in for homosexuals and will defend that life style regardless of its consequences.
After conducting an extensive study on homosexual behavior, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reports that those involved in such lifestyles experience a far greater amount of violence from one another than those in heterosexual relationships.
The results show that men and women involved in homosexual behavior undergo much higher rates of sexual violence than men and women who are heterosexual.
Surprising to many, homosexual women experience more violence than men. According to the study, a whopping 44 percent of lesbians were either raped, experienced physical abuse, and/or were stalked by their intimate partners during their lifetime. Even more shockingly, 61 percent of bisexual women endured such violence from their partners.
It is also reported that 37 percent of bisexual women indicated they were stalked, which is more than double the rate that heterosexual women experience from their male partners.
Furthermore, the CDC found that 37 percent of bisexual women were injured during the rape, physical violence, and/or stalking that they experienced at the hands of their sexual partners. [Emphasis added]
In March Cuomo boycotted North Carolina where the legislature, as reported by Vanity Fair, passed a bill “to override the city of Charlotte’s attempts to pass a localized ordinance expanding L.G.B.T. protections, specifically by targeting constituents’ fears that transgender individuals could use the planned Charlotte rule to prey on the opposite sex in bathrooms.”
While these so-called “anti-discrimination”/”gender identity” laws are presented to limit discrimination, these radical laws and policies discriminate against women by forcing them to endure public indecent exposure. Do you know any other law or policy that a sets apart rules for less than 1 percent of the population (transgenders), but another huge portion of the population (women and girls) are told that they must endure men’s publicly indecency – all in the name of civil rights?
“This is political correctness run amok,” North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory said, dismissing the claims of discrimination against homosexuals by Cuomo.
We agree. Political correctness wants and demands we believe the absurd. You become an enemy of the state, in this case New York, if you choose to not believe the absurd.
It appears that Governor Cuomo is exhibiting macroagression towards the citizens of Mississippi and North Carolina. These two states are resisting and have drawn a red line in the sand against the grand absurdity.
http://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/new-york-toilet.jpg370640Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2016-04-08 07:09:272016-04-10 04:57:30New York in the Toilet: Gender Confused Governor Cuomo (D) Bans Travel to Mississippi
When Governor John Kasich said recently that he probably should be running in the Democrat Party, he wasn’t kidding. Although seeking office in Cuba might be even more fitting.
Taking a break from lecturing us on how we must accept amnesty, the presidential contender recently weighed in on the case of the Oregon bakers fined $135,000 for refusing to bake a cake for a faux wedding. Mentioned briefly in Thursday’s GOP presidential debate, here are his comments, made on Monday at the University of Virginia:
I think, frankly, our churches should not be forced to do anything that’s not consistent with them. But if you’re a cupcake maker and somebody wants a cupcake, make them a cupcake. Let’s not have a big lawsuit or argument over all this stuff — move on. The next thing, you know, they might be saying, if you’re divorced you shouldn’t get a cupcake.
Now, Kasich is a man who just loves the idea of moving on. After the Obergefell v. Hodges decision last June, he said that recognition of faux marriage was “the law of the land and we’ll abide by it” and that now “it’s time to move on.” It’s no wonder Republicans long ago move on from the idea of him as president.
Kasich managed to squeeze a remarkable number of misconceptions into his three sentences. First, while the cupcake lines may be cute to some and possess rhetorical flair, they’re nonsense. There’s not one Christian baker persecuted by governments recently who said he wouldn’t bake “cupcakes” or anything else for a given group; in fact, these businessmen have made clear that they serve homosexuals all the time. This isn’t about serving a certain type of people.
It’s about servicing a certain type of event.
Only someone who hasn’t bothered to ponder the matter deeply or who’s intellectually dishonest could miss this simple fact. And I’ll put it to you, Governor Kasich: can you cite any other time in American history when the government compelled a businessman to service an event he found morally objectionable? This is unprecedented. And is it really a road we want to go down?
If so, can the government compel a Jewish or black businessman to cater, respectively, a Nazi or KKK affair? How about a forcing a Muslim restaurateur to serve pork at an event for the National Pork Producers Council? Or is this another situation where government gets to pick winners and losers, this time in matters of conscience?
Of course, this is already happening, which brings us to Kasich’s divorcé cupcake eater. The proper analogy here doesn’t involve serving such a person because, again, the bakers in question serve homosexuals.
The proper analogy involves servicing an event celebrating a divorce.
Government wouldn’t even consider compelling participation in the above, or in events celebrating adultery, fornication, polygamy (yet) or auto-eroticism. So why the double standard? Well, homosexuals have very effective lobbying groups and millions of enablers — such as Cupcake Kasich.
Kasich‘s “churches should not be forced to do anything that’s not consistent with them. But…” comment is also interesting. Our First Amendment reads “Congress shall make no law…prohibiting the free exercise” of religion. For those who say this is only meant to restrain the central government’s legislature (and I’m sympathetic to this view), note that the constitution of Kasich’s own state dictates that no “interference with the rights of conscience be permitted.” And since he was commenting on a case involving Oregon residents, consider that the Beaver State’s constitution likewise reads, “No law shall in any case whatever control the free exercise, and enjoyment of religeous [sic] opinions, or interfere with the rights of conscience.”
Now, “exercise” is action; thus, at issue here isn’t just the freedom of religious belief, but of acting on that belief. Of course, there are limits in that we don’t allow practices such as human sacrifice. But anything considered legitimate action under these constitutions is allowed in churches. And here’s the point: none of these constitutions limit this free exercise to church property.
Thus, any type of exercise allowable in church is allowable outside of it.
So for this reason alone, the action against the Oregon bakers was unconstitutional. Since a person can refuse to be party to a faux wedding within a church, he can also refuse to be party to a faux wedding outside of it.
Interestingly, Kasich and others seem to be espousing a kind of “dual truth” philosophy, which I understand is part of Islamic theology. This basically states what what’s “religiously true” may not be true beyond the religious realm (whatever that’s supposed to be). But a moral issue doesn’t cease to be a moral issue because it moves down the block.
The action against the bakers is unconstitutional for another reason. Perhaps invariably, part of creating a wedding cake is placing a written message on it; in the case of faux weddings, this message would relate to faux marriage. Even two male figurines placed on top of the cake relate a message; note here that the courts have rule that symbolic speech is covered under the First Amendment. And where does the government have the constitutional power to compel people to be party to a message they find morally objectionable? Forced speech is not free speech.
Of course, none of this would be an issue if we accepted a principle even many conservatives today reject: freedom of association. Think about it: you have a right to include in or exclude from your home whomever you please, for any reason whatsoever, whether it’s because the person is a smoker, non-smoker, black, white, Catholic, Protestant, or because you simply don’t like his face.
Why should you lose this right merely because you erect a few more tables and sell food?
Or because you bake cakes, take pictures, plan weddings or conduct some other kind of commerce?
It’s still your property, paid for with your own money and created by the sweat of your own brow. Is a man’s home not his castle?
Of course, this all goes back to a Supreme Court ruling stating that private businesses can be viewed as “public accommodations,” which was a huge step toward the Marxist standard disallowing private property. And it has led to endless litigation, with the Boy Scouts sued by homosexuals, atheists and a girl (who wanted to be a “boy” scout); the PGA Tour sued by a handicapped golfer who wanted a dispensation from the rules; Abercrombie & Fitch sued by a Muslim woman who wanted to wear her hijab on the job; and Barnes & Noble sued by a male employee who claimed he suddenly was a female employee, just to name a few cases. It has also led, now, to some Americans being confronted with a Hobson’s choice: cast the exercise of your faith to the winds and bow before the government’s agenda, or kiss making a living goodbye.
Is all of this worth it just to stop less than one percent of the population from discriminating in unfashionable ways? And remember, freedom of association is like any other freedom: it’s only the unpopular exercise of it that needs protection. As for popular exercise, its popularity is usually protection enough.
As for Kasich’s desire for popularity, it’s pretty hard to achieve when your implied campaign slogan is “A chicken-hearted politician in every office and a coerced cupcake in every cupboard.”