Activist Teachers Recruit Middle Schoolers for ‘LGBTQ Clubs,’ Mock Parents – FBI raids house of mom who protested school board – Government kills ALL public voices

LGBT pride or LGBTQ+ gay pride with rainbow flag for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people human rights social equality movements in June month - stock photo
Chinnapong/Getty Images

DR. SUSAN BERRY 19 Nov 2021

Author and journalist Abigail Shrier said authenticated documents and audio files sent to her reveal activist teachers are working to personally recruit middle school-age children for “LGBTQ clubs” by tracking their Google searches, all while subverting parents.

Shrier, the author of Irreversible Damage: the Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughterswrote at her Substack column Thursday that the leaked materials from a meeting of the California Teachers Association (CTA) last month revealed the union “advising teachers on best practices for subverting parents, conservative communities and school principals on issues of gender identity and sexual orientation.”

“Speakers went so far as to tout their surveillance of students’ Google searches, internet activity, and hallway conversations in order to target sixth graders for personal invitations to LGBTQ clubs, while actively concealing these clubs’ membership rolls from participants’ parents,” she added.

The documents and files, Shrier reported, were “authenticated by three conference participants,” at a sold-out event in Palm Springs October 29-31:

The “2021 LGBTQ+ Issues Conference, Beyond the Binary: Identity & Imagining Possibilities,” provided best practices workshops that encouraged teachers to “have the courage to create a safe environment that fosters bravery to explore sexual orientation, gender identity and expression,” according to the precis of a talk given by fifth grade teacher, C. Scott Miller.

According to Shrier’s report, some of the union’s workshops advised teachers on how to create the LGBTQ clubs commonly known as “Gay-Straight Alliance” (GSA) groups, while one – “Queering in the Middle” – zeroed in on how to especially grab the attention of middle school-age children.

Lori Caldeira, Buena Vista Middle School teacher and LGBTQ-club adviser in the Spreckels Union School District (SUSD) is reportedly heard on an audio file addressing the issue of what to do about parents who object to their 12-year-old participating in an LGBTQ club.

“Because we are not official – we have no club rosters, we keep no records,” Caldeira reportedly said. “In fact, sometimes we don’t really want to keep records because if parents get upset that their kids are coming? We’re like, ‘Yeah, I don’t know. Maybe they came?’ You know, we would never want a kid to get in trouble for attending if their parents are upset.”

Another middle school teacher, Kelly Baraki, was reportedly heard describing how she has changed the name of her “GSA” to the “Equity Club,” and then later to “You Be You,” in order to keep parents at bay.

Shrier said both Caldeira and Baraki led a workshop titled, “How we run a ‘GSA’ in Conservative Communities.”

Keeping middle school children focused on their sexual orientations and gender identities is still a challenge to these activist teachers.

A boy carries a flag during the New York City Pride March, June 26, 2016, in New York City. (Photo by Eric Thayer/Getty Images)

Shrier reported advice from Baraki:

So, we started to try and identify kids. When we were doing our virtual learning – we totally stalked what they were doing on Google, when they weren’t doing school work. One of them was googling “Trans Day of Visibility.” And we’re like, “Check.” We’re going to invite that kid when we get back on campus. Whenever they follow the Google Doodle links or whatever, right, we make note of those kids and the things that they bring up with each other in chats or email or whatever.

“We use our observations of kids in the classroom—conversations that we hear—to personally invite students,” Baraki reportedly continued. “Because that’s really the way we kinda get the bodies in the door. Right? They need sort of a little bit of an invitation.”

Caldeira reportedly said she uses her job as the teacher who runs morning announcements as another strategy:

I’m the one who controls the messaging. Everybody says, “Oh, Ms. Caldeira, you’re so sweet, you volunteered to do that.” Of course, I’m so sweet that I volunteered to do that. Because then I control the information that goes home. And for the first time, this year, students have been allowed to put openly LGBT content into our morning announcement slides.

Caldeira apparently touted in the audio clip that her LGBTQ student “team” consists of three children, “two of them are non-binary, and the other one is just very fluid in every way – she’s fabulous.”

“So, it’s actually a nice group,” she reportedly said. “And the principal, she may flinch, but she [flinches] privately.”

To prevent the problem of “parent backlash” after middle schoolers spill the beans to their parents about the actual content of the “anti-bullying” presentation taught by Caldeira and Baraki, Shrier reported Baraki said, “Next year, we’re going to do just a little mind-trick on our sixth graders.”

The teacher explained:

They were last to go through this presentation and the gender stuff was the last thing we talked about. So next year, they’ll be going first with this presentation and the gender stuff will be the first thing they are about. Hopefully to mitigate, you know, these kind of responses, right?

“Parents who oppose this material being taught to their sixth graders will find that their objections arrive too late,” Shrier noted, commenting further on some of the two teachers’ remarks about parent objections.

Baraki, for example, mocked one parent who objected to the presentation, asserting she had not planned on discussing gender identity with her middle school-age child as yet.

“I know, so sad, right?” Baraki was apparently heard ridiculing the parent. “Sorry for you, you had to do something hard! Honestly, your twelve-year-old probably knew all that, right?”

When another parent voiced strong objections to the content of the presentation and the principal suggested she send her child to a private school, Caldeira reportedly said, “So that was a win, right? We count that as a win.”

“Plus, I hate to say this, but thank you CTA—but I have tenure!” the teacher boasted further. “You can’t fire me for running a GSA. And so, you can be mad, but you can’t fire me for it. CTA has made it very clear that they are devoted to human rights and equity. They provide us with these sources, these resources and tools.”

Shrier observed the irony of Caldeira’s comment to her teacher audience.

“You should know, we’ve also acted with great integrity in the past several years that we have run [a GSA],” Caldeira reportedly said. “We never crossed a line. We’ve wanted to, but we never have.”

The school district provided the following response to Shrier’s report, noting, “The teachers were using personal leave to lead a breakout session in their roles as CTA members; they were not officially presenting on behalf of SUSD, nor were their presentation materials or comments reviewed by SUSD administration.”

“Many of the comments and themes stated in the article are alarming, concerning, disappointing, and do not in any way reflect the District or Board of Education’s policies and practices,” SUSD officials said, addressing the steps the district is now taking:

  • The student club mentioned in the article, UBU (You be You), has been suspended.
  • Any future student clubs will be required to submit an outline of all activities and materials before being allowed to meet. Student sign-in sheets will be maintained and parent/guardian permission slips will be sent home prior to a club holding a meeting.
  • All messaging shared in the morning announcements will now be controlled and distributed by the site principal. This practice will be in place permanently.
  • Any presentation or assembly involving sensitive themes such as sexuality will be created in line with state-approved standards and curriculum, and under the supervision of site and district administration. Materials of any sensitive themes will be shared with parents/guardians prior to being shown to students.
  • Teachers are prohibited from monitoring students’ online activity for any non-academic purposes.

“Regarding the teachers involved, appropriate personnel steps are being taken to make sure such activities and comments will not be repeated,” the response stated.

https://www.breitbart.com/education/2021/11/19/abigail-shrier-activist-teachers-recruit-middle-schoolers-lgbtq-clubs-mock-parents/


It begins: FBI raids house of mom who protested school board

At home with 3 children when federal agents demanded entry

By WND News Services November 22, 2021

Sherronna Bishop (Video screenshot)

Sherronna Bishop (Video screenshot)

By Leo Hohmann

An FBI SWAT team raided the home of an activist mother of four in Colorado on Tuesday, Nov. 16, knocking down her door, bursting into the house with guns and handcuffing her while she was homeschooling her children.

This is the first known case of the federal government making good on its promise to not only intimidate but actually carry out a raid on a mom who was involved in her local school board politics, said Brannon Howse, who interviewed Sherronna Bishop at Lindell TV Wednesday night.

The U.S. Department of Justice and Attorney General Merrick Garland issued an Oct. 4 memorandum directing federal, state and local law enforcement to look for parents to prosecute nationwide who may have made “threats” and made “harassing” phone calls to school board members nationwide, equating such parents to domestic terrorists.

Now a mother, Sherronna Bishop of Grand Junction, Colorado, has felt the brute force of the FBI’s heavily armed SWAT unit used against her family.

She was at home with her three children about 9:30 a.m. Tuesday when she heard someone pounding on the front door, then using a battering ram to break it down. She said the officers “manhandled” her 18-year-old daughter, pulling her up the stairs by her hoodie, while another officer put her in handcuffs and ushered her out of the house. They proceeded to search the entire house.

UPDATE AS OF NOV. 19: The FBI has filed no charges against Bishop.

Three of Bishop’s four children, ages 8, 10 and 18, were home at the time of the raid, as was her husband, who was also handcuffed. Her 17-year-old son was at his high school.

Besides being a frequent attendee at her local school board meetings, Bishop has also been active in the voter integrity movement in her state and locality. She runs the website Americasmom.net, and on that site she features an article and video under the title We the Parents: How Did We Get Here?

She said she has not been guilty of anything but speaking her mind in accordance with her First Amendment rights.

“This is still the United States of America, where we are able to state what we think and we believe,” she told Howse. “There was some pounding on my door. I didn’t really know what to think, I thought at first it might be some neighbor kids. They were pounding profusely, and then it hit me it was the FBI. I took my kids to their bedrooms. They used a battering ram to bash down my door, they cuffed me. And then proceeded to search and go through my whole home.”

She said the agents would not tell her why they were searching her home. They did leave behind documents related to the search warrant, saying they entered her home because she was suspected of causing “intentional damage to a protected computer, wire fraud and conspiracy to cause damage to a protected computer.”

“I don’t know anything about this. They couldn’t explain any of this,” she said. “I will tell you why: they were at my home to intimidate me, to shut me up, because I was using my First Amendment rights to advocate for [Mesa County Clerk] Tina Peters on the issue of Dominion [voting machines] and the damage done in our election. And they’ll never be held accountable. Instead they will criminalize this woman who has stood up.”

“I know people will say, well Sherronna, why don’t you just shut your mouth… That’s exactly what they hope you will do. I can open my mouth and say whatever I want to say and that is not a criminal action. This is about their desire to shut you down and stop you from saying it.”

“I’m a law abiding citizen, I’m very supportive of law enforcement,” she continued. “I love the Constitution. And what happened yesterday, what happened is something I never imagined I would experience in America.”

Bishop said she uses her website, AmericasMom.net, to educate and inform parents and moms regarding their children’s education.

“And since then we’ve gotten involved in school board races. I love my state. I’m a fourth generation Coloradan. Most recently I’ve been a very vocal advocate of a candidate [Peters]… She’s had to fight for her own life, and a guess now I’ll have to fight for mine.”

Bishop has been part of a group of parents that have been successful in fighting the teaching of critical race theory and school mask mandates.

“Colorado was able to flip nine school boards this year. We were able to get one of our leftists to resign and we also flipped our school board in the election,” Bishop said. “And people like me are considered domestic terrorists now, because we don’t stand for the policies that have been forced upon our children.”

Howse said history will be kind to Bishop.

“I believe you will go down in history as the first mom targeted [by the FBI]. The FBI has said it plans to do this and I believe you are the first mom to have this done to you. Mask mandates, opposing critical race theory, election theft, which Biden said if you question that you are involved in subversion. But I believe you are the first mom to have been targeted and had your door literally busted down while you were homeschooling your kids.”

Bishop said she has always made a point of being transparent.

“I have always made myself available, I’ve never tried to hide from anything and now for them to bash my door down, manhandle my daughter… I think the timing is really interesting, because we don’t want people to be silent because of what happened to me. If anything I want people to be more vocal,… because this is still America and you still have the right to stand up for yourself and your family.”

“I believe elections have consequences, and in this case this illegitimate regime is having serious consequences for all of America.”

Howse asked if she ever thought she would be targeted in this way by her own government.

“No I never thought in America that a suburban housewife and mom would have her door bashed in by the FBI,” she said.

He asked about her three children.

“My kids are very resilient. And part of schooling them has been to teach them the proper role of government and the proper role of law enforcement and I can’t convince them now that the FBI are good guys. And I really have my own doubts about that now. You cannot just say ‘I followed orders’ to go bash someone’s door down. They are responsible for what they are doing.”

Howse had just concluded a series of interviews with a panel of four retired FBI agents just days before the raid in which they had described similar raids against non-violent patriotic Americans over the last few years, starting with Gen. Michael Flynn in 2016, followed by the pre-dawn raid on author and Trump ally Roger Stone in 2019 and then the violent entering of journalist James O’Keefe of Project Veritas just last week.

“I was on the [FBI] SWAT team for several years,” said Brian Shepard, appearing with three other retired FBI agents at a symposium aired by WVW TV on Nov. 16. “And I can tell you from my experience, and I think all others of the bureau agents here would echo what I’m going to say. We never conducted a search or conducted an arrest of someone who was not a violent offender. And the thought when I heard about what happened with Roger Stone, just outraged me so much that, it just rose up inside me.”

Now, an activist mom has been targeted, raising the question: Has the FBI become the political shock troops for the White House, seeking to harass and intimidate anyone who speaks out against its policies?

Howse said it was obvious that Shepard became emotional when he began talking about how the bureau, he gave the better part of his life to serve, had now taken to bashing down the doors of non-violent American patriots.

“Brian’s reaction is very typical of men in that generation who served in the FBI, and many of those men have responded the same way, because they gave the best years of their lives to the agency, and upheld what they believed were the values of the agency, bravery, integrity and fidelity, and they become emotional when they saw how this has been discarded. They are beside themselves. It happened to others and now it happens to you, within days of our filming [of the panel].”

Bishop said the timing was not lost on her.

“I can’t explain it. I can’t explain being a target, for an agency that typically takes down the cartel, human trafficking, and now I’ve had my children traumatized and if this can happen to me, they’ll come for you too.”

“I made myself completely transparent to them and yet they chose to break down my door, terrorize my kids and try to intimidate me.”

She said the agents took her phone and other devices and kept her handcuffed for at least 30 minutes.

“No, I never had any access to any voting machines. They know I am just a voice, an advocate. We must have been effective. I know the people here, they’re not going to back down, and we’re not going to stop. In times past they never would have moved forward on this, but the narrative in America right now is one that is pushing a progressive narrative of communism. Now you can stay in your home and talk about it privately but you dare not come out and talk about it publicly …or they will send the FBI to your door because according to this regime you are a domestic terrorist.

“We’ve got to stick together and we can’t let these thugs put us into fear and intimidation.”

Howse said he was shocked by the news of Bishop’s experience.

“I could see them moving against someone like me, or Mike Lindell. It is hard to see them coming after someone like you, to come after a mom, who is working at the school board level and the election level, and to bust your door down? This is totally unprecedented by the agency in how they conducted themselves. So even for someone who has studied communism and a color revolution, the way they are doing it and the pace at which they’re doing it, I never anticipated it to move this fast.”

[Editor’s note: This story originally was published by by LeoHohmann.com.]


Government kills ALL public voices to avoid hearing one explosive issue

Bans residents from making any personal comments

By Bob Unruh November 21, 2021

(Photo by Joe Kovacs)

Commissioners in one Wyoming county where parents have raised objections – 85 so far – to what they consider pornographic material being made available to children in the public library – apparently think they’ve solved the dispute.

They are refusing to accept any public comments at their meetings.

On any issue.

It seems they tried to ban comments on just the library and its problems, but were warned that it’s illegal to censor statements based on their content, so took the dramatic step of refusing to allow any public comments.

The details come from MassResistance, whose Wyoming members have been instrumental in raising community concerns over the presence of objectionable materials and their availability to children.

The organization explained the commissioners “did not hide their reason: The majority of the commissioners do not want to hear any more complaints or criticism (from Wyoming MassResistance parents) about the lurid pornographic books in the public library children’s and teen’s sections.”

The report explained it was on Oct. 15 that Campbell County commissioners announced “no public comments about the library books would be allowed.”

“But then, apparently, the concept of banning a particular type of speech seemed problematic. So at their next meeting, on October 19, the Commission voted 3-2 to ban all public testimony at their meetings,” the report said.

The report explained, “The library books in question tell young teenage boys and girls that ‘gay’ sex is desirable and instruct them in graphic detail how to engage in a variety of perverted homosexual and lesbian sex acts. Some of the books overtly encourage girls to become lesbian. Another promotes the ‘how-to’ for girls to “transition” to boys by having breast removal surgery, taking male hormones to grow facial hair, and …”

Parents have protested, and the commissioners have insisted they go through a formal “challenge” process for each objection.

“That is an insulting sham. The same library employees who brought the books into the library decide on the ‘challenge.’ So far, there have been over 85 formal challenges filed by parents in the community with the library. The challenges have all been denied; not a single book has been removed from the library,” the report said.

Documents obtained by MassResistance through a Freedom of Information process even revealed that one county official suggested bringing police in to commission meetings to “control upset parents,” the report said.

WND previously reported on a criminal complaint filed with the sheriff’s office by two parents over the books.

They charged that while Wyoming law exempts schools and libraries from prosecution for displaying obscene material, the “law does not exempt them” if they encourage children to engage in sexual relations, which is a crime.

However, when local authorities who would have been required to defend the library in such a case called in a special counsel from an adjacent county to review the case, he declined to take any action, claiming that the objectionable books might have “scientific” value.

Parents Hugh and Susan Bennett had submitted copies of four of the books with their request that charges be filed under the state law that penalizes those to solicit “anyone less than the age of 14” to engage in sexual acts.

The Bennetts had pointed out “This Book is Gay” teaches children how to participate in homosexual and lesbian acts, “How Do You Make a Baby” includes pornographic drawings, “Doing It: Let’s Talk About Sex” promotes “sexual pleasure for children,” “Sex is a Funny Word” coaches 8-year-olds to “be comfortable getting naked and being touched,” and “Dating and Sex: A Guide for the 21st Century Teen Boy” teaches how to enjoy pornography.

Jonathan G. Lange, a pastor of a church on the other side of Wyoming, wrote just at the same time at the Federalist about the problem facing parents.

Lange, the leader of the Wyoming Pastors Network, pointed out the American Library Association “recognizes no age limits on what children can access — either in print, video, audio, or online.”

He explained that means the ALA opposes restrictions on porn, citing filters on computers as well as the books, “Doing It,” “The V-Word” and “This Book is Gay.”

“Unless you read the above-named titles for yourself, you will likely not believe what unsuspecting children can encounter in your local library. These titles would be perfectly at home in the seediest ‘adult book store.’ Who but the most jaded parents would dream that a library might display them in the children’s section at the eye-level of your average seven-year-old?”

And the libraries?

He explained, “By attractive, kid-friendly displays, they invite curious children to read what your local newspaper editor is ashamed to print.”

He warned American libraries are turning the Constitution on its head.

“Every county and school district library in America could be indecently exposing children to explicit content. Most libraries endorse and subscribe to the ALA’s twisted version of the First Amendment. Through guidance such as the Library Bill of Rights, The Freedom to Read Statement, and the Freedom to View Statement, the ALA treats parents shielding the innocence of their own children as violators of the First Amendment,” he said.


Related

Hungary Tells EU it Has No Business Telling Hungarians How to Raise Their Kids

Standoff over teaching of LGBT issues intensifies.

 4 August, 2021

Paul Joseph Watson

Thierry Monasse via Getty Images

The Hungarian government has informed the EU it has no business telling Hungarians how to raise their kids following the globalist body’s interference over the teaching of LGBT issues in schools.

A law passed by Hungary’s National Assembly last month ensured that sex education in schools “must not be aimed” at “promoting homosexuality” or “changing gender,” according to ruling party Fidesz.

The law also bans showing children under the age of 18 material related to homosexuality or transgenderism on television, movies or in advertisements.

This triggered the unelected European Commission, which launched two infringement procedures against the law, while the leaders of the EU’s 17 biggest countries reacted by penning a letter arguing the legislation represented a violation of “fundamental rights.”

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen also labeled the law “a disgrace,” claiming it “uses the protection of children as an excuse to discriminate against people because of their sexual orientation.”

It was even alleged that the EU was deliberately withholding coronavirus relief funds from Hungary as punishment.

Last month, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán announced that a national referendum on the law would be held, cementing the right of the Hungarian people to assert a sovereign say in how their country is run.

Hungary has been attacked on an unprecedented scale only because the protection of #children and families is our priority, and in view of this, we are unwilling to let #LGBTQ lobby into our schools and kindergartens. pic.twitter.com/dtj9h5hJAh

— Judit Varga (@JuditVarga_EU) August 3, 2021

Hungary has now hit back at the “unprecedented attacks” it is under from the EU over the issue by asserting that the manner in which children are educated is the “exclusive right of Hungarian parents.”

Hungary’s Justice Minister Judit Varga released a statement vowing to stand up to “interference” from Brussels bullies.

“Hungary has been attacked on an unprecedented scale only because the protection of children and families is our priority, and in view of this, we are unwilling to let [the] LGBTQ lobby into our schools and kindergartens,” Ms Varga wrote.

“How Hungarian children are raised is the exclusive right of Hungarian parents. Brussels cannot interfere in that. According to all fundamental documents of the EU that Hungary has ever adopted, signed [and] ratified, raising children remains a national competence,” she added.

Hungary’s position is in complete accordance with Article 14 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, which gives member states, “The freedom to found educational establishments with due respect for democratic principles and the right of parents to ensure the education and teaching of their children in conformity with their religious, philosophical, and pedagogical convictions shall be respected, in accordance with the national laws governing the exercise of such freedom and right.”

A benchmark of how the Hungarian people feel about the LGBT movement can be judged from the treatment of a rainbow-colored statue erected in Budapest in April by leftist activists in honor of Black Lives Matter.

It was demolished within 24 hours.

Family doctor suspended after sharing Christian beliefs online

Dec 27, 2020

Image: Family doctor suspended after sharing Christian beliefs online

(Natural News) A family doctor has been suspended from medical practice in Australia after sharing his Christian beliefs online.

(Article by Ben Davis republished from CaldronPool.com)

Dr Jereth Kok was investigated by the Medical Board of Australia last year after they received two complaints about posts he had shared on social media.

Dr Jereth Kok and family.

Despite not knowing Dr Kok, the complainants allegedly searched through ten-years of his personal feed before taking exception to his views about a broad range of political topics, including abortion, sexuality, “LGBT” issues, and gender “transition” treatments.

“The material is very diverse,” Dr Kok told FamilyVoice during a recent interview. It includes political and theological discussions with other Christians on Bill Muehlenberg’s blog, the most recent from 2012.

“It includes posts and comments I’ve made on my own personal Facebook page, and ‘memes’ and articles that I’ve shared there; including articles by the American political commentator Matt Walsh, and the satire site Babylon Bee,” Dr Kok explained.

“I never dreamt that publicly sharing a Matt Walsh or Babylon Bee article would be career-ending; hindsight is a wonderful thing,” he said.

Dr Kok’s list of offences also included sharing a Facebook post from National Pulse, Editor In Chief, Raheem Kassam, which highlighted the evolution of the arguments used to justify abortion over the last half-century.

Also in question was an opinion piece Dr Kok had penned on the subject of transgenderism for Christian magazine Eternity back in 2015.

“This one stands out from the others,” Dr Kok explained, “because it was public and has me wearing my doctor hat.

“All the rest was written in a personal capacity, for a small audience of friends and family.”

It wasn’t until nine months after the initial complaints were made that Dr Kok learned he was under investigation and that the Board had hired a private investigator to run a dragnet over the internet for content he had written.

On a Friday afternoon in 2019, while consulting with patients, Dr Kok was suddenly given notice that he was to be summarily removed from practice to protect “public interest.”

The following week, Dr Kok attended a 15-minute hearing where he was informed his registration was suspended, meaning he could no longer provide care or speak to his patients.

Dr Kok has said despite there being a legal obligation to provide regular updates, he hasn’t heard from the Board in over a year – not a single update during the 30 months of investigation.

During this time, Dr Kok has not been provided with an opportunity to properly respond to any of the allegations that led to his suspension.

Significantly, the allegation that Dr Kok was providing compromised healthcare to “LGBT” patients was not brought forward by any of his patients or colleagues.

“I’ve practised medicine for over 15 years,” Dr Kok said. “I’ve looked after many people who would identify as ‘LGBT.’ None of them has ever complained about rudeness, discrimination, etc.

“When you are a professional, rule number one is you treat everybody the same regardless of what you might personally think of their background, life choices, habits, political affiliation, criminal record, and so on.’

“I’ve never had any difficulty doing this,” he said.

Dr Kok said it wasn’t his intention to insult anyone, but rather to speak the truth, truths which are foundational to civilisation, namely, the value of human life, the structure of the family, and our existence as male and female.

Following his suspension, Dr Kok was left without a job, and his family without his income. Many of his patients who had come to trust and depend on him as their GP for over a decade were suddenly left without his care.

Since his suspension, Dr Kok has been made aware of more than half a dozen doctors who have been in trouble with the Medical Board for expressing their personal opinions about similar topics away from their practice.

“They have been after a doctor for speaking at a pro-life event, a doctor who campaigned against ‘Safe Schools,’ several who have said things on Twitter against abortion and gay marriage, one who left a comment about euthanasia on a website, one who said that gender transition therapies are damaging for children,” Dr Kok said.

According to Dr Kok, each of these doctors have been put through similar investigations, been given warnings, had conditions placed on them, or forced to undergo ‘sensitivity training.’ At least one other has had his medical career effectively ended.

Dr Kok went on to say, it’s clear that tolerance for traditional religious views about things like sexuality and gender are rapidly vanishing.

“We have seen what has happened to people like Israel Folau, Margaret Court, JK Rowling and Brendan Eich. Even a senator was threatened with an anti-discrimination tribunal in Tasmania simply for saying that it isn’t fair for men to compete in women’s sports.

“The worrying thing about what happened to me is that it shows you do not have to be famous to get in trouble—even nobodies can be targeted for ‘cancellation’, for decade-old conversations on an obscure religious blog…

“It is getting increasingly costly to hold unpopular religious beliefs,” Dr Kok added.

Read more at: CaldronPool.com

https://www.naturalnews.com/2020-12-27-family-doctor-shared-christian-beliefs-online-suspended.html

AUDIO SCOTUS LGBT Decision Will ‘Create a Tsunami of New Litigation’ Against Religious Groups

ROBERT KRAYCHIK 15 Jun 2020

The Supreme Court’s (SCOTUS) reinterpretation of a federal prohibition against employment discrimination based on sex — which now includes sexual orientation and “gender identity” — will “create a tsunami of new litigation” against religious organizations, explained Carrie Severino, president of the Judicial Crisis Network, offering her remarks on SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Tonight with host Rebecca Mansour.

The Supreme Court’s legal redefinition of “sex” to include sexual orientation and “gender identity” opens the door for further left-wing lawfare against religious organizations, Severino noted.

Severino said, “The Supreme Court left a lot of really important issues open, like, how do you balance this with religious freedom? How do you balance it with freedom of speech? If you’ve got a law, for example, saying that using someone’s preferred pronoun is mandatory — or you can be fined [for non-compliance], how do we balance that with some of these other important and even constitutional questions? Those are things that, for the most part, are unfortunately going to be just decided by a whole range of lower courts. and it will be a long time before the Supreme Court even takes up the opportunity to weigh in on that.”

Severino predicted, “These questions are going to create a tsunami of new litigation and create a huge amount of uncertainty going forward.”

LISTEN:

The Supreme Court’s decision to extend prohibitions against employment discrimination to include sexual orientation and “gender identity” will place religious and traditional organizations at a legal disadvantage when they are inevitably sued by left-wing outfits.

“You’re going to see these decisions going overwhelmingly in favor of the litigants [and] the plaintiffs who are challenging any religious organization, or any school, or anyone who wants to maintain a traditional, biologically based, scientific-based understanding of sex,” Severino forecasted.

“The logic that the court embraced” sets in motion a legal momentum for lower courts to render future decisions in favor of plaintiffs suing religious and traditional organizations for their personnel decisions, Severino anticipated.

Mansour asked if religious organizations would surrender to left-wing activist groups filing lawsuits based on the Supreme Court’s decision given their insufficient resources to legally defend themselves.

Severino replied, “That’s part of the strategy of the activists because they know that many of these organizations can’t afford to pay for defense. They can’t afford to risk a negative judgment where they could face crippling fines. If you’re talking about individuals, you’ve seen what’s happened with cases like the Masterpiece Cake Shop case, where someone’s entire business and livelihood could be destroyed and where they can face even personal threats and real concern over their own safety if they are willing to carry on litigation.”

Severino added, “I think the intimidation factor of a lawsuit is huge, and when you’ve got the court almost inviting that, it’s going to present a real challenge for a lot of people. Practically speaking, for the most part, this isn’t even going to be an issue because I think there’s the vast majority of businesses don’t have any reason or desire to discriminate on either of these bases, but there are circumstances where it is either relevant to the job qualifications or where it’s going to be an issue of conscience, and those are the ones where you’re going to have people who are going to be forced to make those tough choices between violating their own conscience and possibly losing their livelihood.”

The Supreme Court’s decision amounted to a rewriting of civil rights legislation, Severino stated.

“This had to do with the court interpreting the Civil Rights Act of 1964,” Severino explained. “We’re kind of familiar with this language. It says that no employers can discriminate on the basis of sex, of religion, of natural origin, and other kinds of classic caveats that you have, but what their question was, ‘It says you can’t discriminate ion the basis of sex. Does that also mean you can’t discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity?’”

Severino continued, “It’s kind of a strange question to be asking because in so many states, now, and in many situations in federal law, we already do have laws preventing discrimination based on sexual orientation, but they never phrase it as ‘discrimination based on sex.’ It’s always explicitly written, ‘discrimination based on sexual orientation.’”

“What the Supreme Court did is, in an opinion, they basically just rewrote what that text said because there is a long-standing history where for decades, no politicians [and] no judge said that language meant sexual orientation, as well,” Severino added.

The Supreme Court’s decision usurps the role of legislators, Severino determined.

“That’s really a revisionist reading of the statute dressed up as textualism, and that’s one of the things that is so dangerous because we have laws that courts can effectively rewrite,” Severino concluded. “No legislator who passed [Title VII of the Civil Rights Act] would have thought it meant that.”

Breitbart News Tonight broadcasts live on SiriusXM Patriot channel 125 weeknights from 9:00 p.m. to midnight Eastern or 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Pacific.

Follow Robert Kraychik on Twitter.

https://www.breitbart.com/radio/2020/06/15/carrie-severino-scotus-lgbt-decision-tsunami-litigation-religious-groups/

Rally to draw attention to ‘Repeal Obergefell’ movement

Ex-gays to speak in favor of traditional marriage

 

marriage_definition

When the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 ruling that Chief Justice John Roberts argued in dissent was unconnected to the U.S. Constitution, created same-sex “marriage” in 2015, progressives cheered.

But the impact went beyond marriage,  creating a conflict between newly acquired LGBT rights and the constitutional right of citizens to exercise their religion.

Among the victims was Jack Phillips, who was sued over and over for refusing to use his wedding artistry to promote what the Bible defines as sin. And Melissa Klein, for the same. In addition, wedding venue operators, calligraphers and photographers have been targeted because of their beliefs.

Now a rally is being held to promote a movement to repeal of the Supreme Court’s Obergefell v. Hodges decision.

It’s being organized by Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality and others.

He contends the “gay marriage” decision was based on the lie that homosexuality is immutable, like race.

How does he know? He will have a number of former homosexuals, including David Arthur, confirm that.

The rally, on a public sidewalk near the Supreme Court in Washington, will point out the fundamental flaw in the majority opinion from Anthony Kennedy, now retired, who claimed homosexuality or sexual orientation is immutable.

“Yet many men and women have left this immoral lifestyle behind,” LaBarbera’s announcement said.

“Arthur and several others who came out of homosexuality and gender confusion (transgenderism) will speak at this year’s ‘Repeal Obergefell’ rally,” the announcement said.

It was held  at 10:30 a.m. on Wednesday, June 26.

That day is the fourth anniversary of the decision that, rally organizers say, gave America the “unconstitutional, immoral and tyrannical Obergefell v. Hodges.”

The announcement says: “They have the media. They have the power. They have the money. But we have the truth.”

Speakers included former homosexual Stephen Black of First Stone Ministries, former female-to-male transgender Laura Perry, Pastor Stephen Broden of Fair Park Bible Fellowship. Others are LaBarbera, Arthur, Bruce Johnson of Metropolitan Marriage Association and constitutional law expert William Olson.

The issue has been in headlines because Democratic candidate Pete Buttigieg, a professing Christian, has attacked the Christian beliefs of Vice President Mike Pence and others on the issue.

But LaBarbera described Buttigieg as “a living, walking and breathing example of the politicized sham that is religious-left ‘Christianity’ today. He claims that God created him as a homosexual – a self-serving blasphemy as audacious as it is biblically nonsensical.”

The announcement said, “Predictably, ‘Mayor Pete’ has quickly become the darling of a media who incessantly promote all things ‘gay’ and ‘trans’ — and who loathe socially conservative Christians who actually believe the Bible in humility, and fear God in reverence.

“The simple truth is that homosexual behaviors are wrong, unnatural, and often unhealthy – yet can be overcome through the grace and power of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 6), as testified by countless ex-‘gays’ and former ‘transgenders.’ No faithful Christian proudly identifies by his or her besetting sins, nor seeks to justify them before a holy God.”

Original here


Differing Views on Christian Doctrine, Identity and Homosexuality – Charts

A Liberal Order That Seeks To Shut Down Christian Charities Doesn’t Deserve To Survive

Christian post-liberals on the right have seen how readily the liberal center-left and the Chamber-of-Commerce right surrender to the extreme and illiberal left. It makes them wonder: Why not us?

A Liberal Order That Seeks To Shut Down Christian Charities Doesn’t Deserve To Survive

Dec 26, 2019

It is a basic Christian teaching that good works are insufficient for spiritual salvation. We should also remember they are unlikely to suffice for cultural and political salvation either.

Chick-fil-A’s abandonment of The Salvation Army is yesterday’s news, but its lessons should be remembered, for they explain our cultural and political trajectory. That the chicken chain capitulated even though everyone was “eating mor chikin” is instructive regarding the power of the LBGT lobby and its allies. That they directed this power against a Christian organization dedicated to feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, and sheltering the homeless — including those who identify as LGBT — is even more instructive.

It exemplifies how hard-liners are driving the cultural left. It is not clear that a majority even of those who identity as LGBT hate The Salvation Army. For example, Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg volunteered for the organization (albeit for a photo op) a couple of years back. Now he is facing criticism from LGBT activists, as those running the movement want total victory, not coexistence. And they are winning.

The campaign included government officials from Buffalo, New York, to San Antonio, Texas, retaliating against Chick-fil-A for its support of The Salvation Army. Even without full control over the government, the left has been aggressive in its use of government power against Christians who believe traditional teachings on human sexuality. The left seems to target particularly those engaged in charitable work, rather than protecting them on account of their good works.

The left’s legal wing is trying to compel Christian hospitals to perform abortions and sex-change surgeries, Christian schools to affirm same-sex relationships, and Christian charities such as women’s shelters to pretend men can be women. A purportedly serious Democratic presidential candidate wanted to tax dissenting Christian organizations, including churches, into oblivion.

The left won’t even spare elderly nuns. When the Trump administration ended Barack Obama’s legal campaign against the Little Sisters of the Poor, various Democratic attorneys general made a point of continuing that unholy effort.

The Rise of Post-Liberal Christianity

This should not surprise us. Jesus promised that the powers of this world would hate his followers, not that they would love us if we were virtuous. While we Christians should always strive to be more like Christ, we should not succumb to a quasi-Pelagianism that presumes our winsomeness determines how others receive the gospel. Christ himself was crucified, and the grace and charity many martyrs exemplified did not save them from persecution unto death.

But that we should expect trouble in this world does not mean we should be disinterested regarding politics, nor does it excuse governments that oppose the church and oppress its people. That our nation seems to be starting down this path has intensified Christian reconsiderations of liberal political theory. Although our government ostensibly protects the freedoms of religion, association, and speech, procedural liberalism increasingly appears insufficient to protect our rights or to ensure a culture of tolerance and pluralism that includes Christians who maintain the traditional teachings of our faith.

The supposedly neutral principles of the legal left consistently restrict the rights and opportunities of orthodox Christians, and the left always pushes the envelope. Christian litigators should, of course, do their best to defend our rights, and thank God for their efforts, but it should be no surprise that more and more Christians are intrigued by varieties of post-liberal thinking, including previously marginalized ideas such as Catholic integralism. It is understandable that Christians are turning against the system of liberal democratic capitalism as it turns against them.

Post-liberal Christians are unlikely to find their minority status daunting, for they see that minorities can win if they are determined and the institutions they face are weak and full of cowards. After all, a minority of hard-line leftists control cultural, economic, and political pressure points that grant them power far beyond their numbers.

For example, the 2020 Democratic field is so radically pro-abortion that even The New York Times has noticed. The Democratic Party stands for abortion today, abortion tomorrow, and abortion forever, as Sen. Elizabeth Warren illustrated in promising that at her inauguration — angels and ministers of grace defend us! — she will wear swag to rep the nation’s largest abortion chain.

Christian post-liberals on the right have seen how readily the liberal center-left and the Chamber-of-Commerce right surrender to the extreme and illiberal left and wonder: Why not us? A decadent and despairing culture with weak institutions and degraded elites is precisely the sort that a determined minority might govern.

Thus, they see an opportunity as our culture disintegrates despite its wealth and technological prowess. Liberal individualism seems to be devouring itself: Fertility is down, loneliness and depression have increased, and deaths of despair from suicide, drugs, and alcohol are way up.

Should Liberalism Be Preserved?

Perhaps it is time to be bold and reorder society toward the highest good, rather than accepting liberalism’s dishonest promises of “live and let live” neutrality. As some post-liberal thinkers note, we increasingly live in a non-Christian integralist society that mandates belief in sectarian dogmas, such as the mystical belief that a man may become — indeed, may already be — a woman. Therefore, they see the alternative to post-liberal Christian politics not as liberalism, but as some sort of post-Christian illiberal politics.

I am sympathetic to some of the post-liberal thought developing on the right. I see the appeal, especially as liberalism’s promise of legal neutrality is exposed as so much fiction. I share many of the critiques of liberal political theory and find its discourse far more interesting than the stale talking points of neoliberals and neoconservatives.

But I am neither Catholic nor Calvinist enough to be much of an integralist, and I remain more skeptical of the likelihood of governmental efficacy and rectitude than many post-liberals seem to be. I also remain attached to many liberal practices, such as the right to trial by jury.

I am, in short, still thinking over these matters and am not entirely in either camp. From this in-between, I would recommend post-liberal thinkers reflect on the frailty and fallibility of human institutions. I also suggest that the defenders of liberal democratic capitalism take the critiques of post-liberals seriously. A liberal order that seeks to shut down Christian charities for nonconformist views on human sexuality does not deserve to survive.

Nathanael Blake is a Senior Contributor at The Federalist. He has a PhD in political theory. He lives in Missouri.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/12/26/a-liberal-order-that-seeks-to-shut-down-christian-charities-doesnt-deserve-to-survive/

Sydney Archbishop Cautions Against ‘Safe Spaces’ and ‘Trigger Warnings’

SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA - DECEMBER 16: Archbishop of Sydney, Most Reverend Anthony Fisher celebrates a mass to pay respect to the victims of the Martin Place siege on December 16, 2014 in Sydney, Australia. Sydney siege gunman Man Haron Monis, was shot dead by police in the early hours of Tuesday …

 

THOMAS D. WILLIAMS, PH.D. 25 Dec 2019

Sydney Archbishop Anthony Fisher warned against the dangers of identity politics in his Christmas morning homily, suggesting that today’s snowflakes risk falling victims to a toxic narcissism.

“As desires change, we can revise our bodies surgically or our beliefs ideologically,” the archbishop said. “But reducing ourselves to our tastes or to a single attribute risks neglecting other important things about us.”

“Amidst celebrity adulation and identity politics, narcissism is now endemic. Too much focus on identity can be distorting,” he warned.

Preaching to a standing room-only crowd of some 2,000 Catholics at St. Mary’s Cathedral Wednesday morning, Fisher said that the modern “era of liquid personality” and “self-generated identities” runs counter to people’s true identities before God.

“Some of our I.D. comes from family, nation and culture,” he said. “But modernity prefers self-generated identities. Much of it is said to be about what we identify with.”

“Sometimes it’s just code for self-indulgence,” Fisher declared. “We humor our preferences with the excuse ‘it’s who we are.’ No need to abide by laws of faith and reason, or to compromise to the needs of others.”

“Safe spaces and trigger warnings coddle our fragile egos,” he added.

Much of the archbishop’s homily seemed aimed at modern theories of gender identity, which propose that a person’s sexual identity is fluid rather than biologically anchored and that sexual orientation is the defining attribute of personal identity.

Fisher said there were “forces” seeking to marginalize the Christian identity in particular, which require a recommitment to the faith from believers.

“If we are confused about values and vocation, we’ll be disinclined to plan or commit. Disengaged from family, Church and society, we fall easy prey to isolation or extremism,” he said.

“Forces threaten our identity and even our existence from the first moment of conception. Some seek to marginalize Christian identity in particular,” he said.

At the same time, people continue to seek God and his truth, the archbishop suggested, as evidenced by the presence of so many at Christmas Mass.

“But your presence here today speaks volumes. It says that our core identity as Christians graces us to be, not just better believers, but better friends and lovers, children and parents, citizens and colleagues,” he said.

In the end, Christmas brings a message of salvific love and turning to Christ means looking for our redemption — and our identity — in Him.

“To call Him our Saviour is to say we need saving – from sin, death, enemies, even ourselves,” Fisher said. “We need liberation – from vices, addictions, all that cages our spirit.”

“To call Him Son, Grace and Glory of God, is to acknowledge that we need a power greater than ourselves. To call Him Wonder-Counsellor, Almighty God and Prince of Peace is to recognize that He has remade us as the wisdom, peace and glory of God,” he said.

https://www.breitbart.com/faith/2019/12/25/sydney-archbishop-cautions-against-safe-spaces-and-trigger-warnings/

VIDEO Latest ‘Marketing of Evil’: ‘Life-changing’ or ‘worst book ever’?

Re-release of David Kupelian’s culture-war classic rekindles fiery controversy

Nov 23, 2019

Dear friends,

marketing-of-evil-paperback

It’s been viciously attacked in leftwing circles as “hate speech,” “despicable” and “the worst book ever” – and even formally condemned by faculty vote on one college campus,  resulting in lawsuits and campus hysteria. But my first book, “The Marketing of Evil,” which has just gone through its (I think) 15th printing and is now available in paperback, is still driving some people crazy, while inspiring others to say it has changed their lives.

In case you’re unfamiliar with it, “The Marketing of Evil” basically explains why and how millions of today’s Americans have come to strongly embrace ideas and behaviors that are corrupt, destructive or insane.

As I explain in the book’s introduction, “Within the space of our lifetime, much of what Americans once almost universally abhorred has been packaged, perfumed, gift-wrapped, and sold to us as though it had great value. By skillfully playing on our deeply felt national values of fairness, generosity, and tolerance, these marketers have persuaded us to embrace as enlightened and noble that which every other generation has regarded as grossly self-destructive – in a word, evil.”

And although the book has been popular and influential – conservative marketing guru and former Heritage Foundation VP Rebecca Hagelin recently described it as “one of the most important books of the last 20 years” – unfortunately not everyone feels so warmly about it.

For example, within a few months of its release, “The Marketing of Evil” became the focal point of a national scandal when several openly homosexual professors at Ohio State University brought “sexual harassment” charges against head librarian Scott Savage, a Christian, after he recommended “The Marketing of Evil” as required reading for all incoming freshmen. The gay profs maintained that merely recommending the book constituted an act of “harassment due to sexual orientation.” (Chapter 1 documents, in LGBT leaders’ own words, their brilliant but little-known strategies for mainstreaming homosexuality and sexual anarchy in a largely Christian country.)

The rest of the faculty members were so intimidated by the angry gay professors that they either voted in agreement with them or abstained out of fear. It was so obviously bizarre and unjust that major media exposure by Sean Hannity, Brit Hume on Fox’s “Special Report,” MSNBC, the New York Post, Human Events and many others – plus stout legal pressure from the Alliance Defending Freedom – caused the university to cave and drop the absurd charges.

As a direct consequence of being publicly branded as “hate literature” and “homophobic tripe” by the Ohio State University faculty, “The Marketing of Evil” immediately became one of the hottest-selling books in the country, topping Amazon’s daily “Current Events” bestseller chart for more than a week.

‘It changed my life!’

Meanwhile, on Amazon, the controversial book has garnered over 500 five-star reader reviews. While a few nasty one-star reviews describe the book as “horrendous,” “truly despicable” and “serving the anti-Christ,” and even accuse me personally of being a “Nazi,” “scum” and “social blight,” the vast majority are much more positive:

  • “Opening this book is like turning on the Sun. … Mr. David Kupelian has written a remarkable book that reveals how the American public has been taken down the slippery slope of moral relativism.”
  • “I finished ‘The Marketing of Evil’ over a month ago. It absolutely changed my life.”
  • “Prepare to see your world with new eyes!”
  • “The way Kupelian writes is phenomenal. … Give this book to everyone you know, you’ll thank me.”
  • “This book has put a powerful voice to many things that truth-loving people in America have felt in their spirits for a long, long time. … I for one am forever changed.”

Pastors fired up

As a result of such notoriety, “The Marketing of Evil” eventually lit a fire in a place where it was more welcome – the nation’s churches. From small-town churches and prayer groups to one of America’s largest Presbyterian congregations, Christian leaders and laymen started getting hold of the book, sometimes by the case, to hand out to fellow churchgoers.

The biggest single church has been that of the late D. James Kennedy, who until his death was perhaps the world’s most influential Presbyterian minister and founder of Coral Ridge Ministries in Fort Lauderdale, Fla. Calling “The Marketing of Evil” a “powerful new book that I wish every Christian in America could read,” Kennedy took the dramatic step of printing 15,000 special-edition softcover copies which he sent to thousands of supporters.

‘A magician’s secrets’

Despite the ongoing controversy, many major conservative and Christian voices have singled out “The Marketing of Evil” as essential reading:

  • “David Kupelian is one of the very few must-read writers in the 21st Century.” – Dr. Ted Baehr, Chairman, Christian Film and Television Commission
  • “If you really want to understand the adversary’s thinking and help turn the tide of battle, read this book!” – David Limbaugh, columnist and bestselling author
  • “Like the dazzling disclosures in the final page of a gripping whodunit or the fascinating revelation of a magician’s secrets, ‘The Marketing of Evil’ irresistibly exposes how it was done.” – Rabbi Daniel Lapin, American Alliance of Jews and Christians
  • “Every parent in America needs to read this book.” – Michelle Malkin, columnist and bestselling author
  • “David Kupelian is one of the most thought-provoking and iconoclastic writers I know.” – Sean Hannity, host of the No. 1 rated Fox News’ “Hannity” show as well as “The Sean Hannity Radio Show”

Watch former “Saturday Night Live” star (and committed Christian) Victoria Jackson talk about “The Marketing of Evil” and its sequel, “How Evil Works.”

The big screen

In 2017, “The Marketing of Evil” was featured in the Hollywood movie “I am Michael” starring James Franco and Zachary Quinto.

marketing of evil i am michael

Scene from “I Am Michael”

In this amazing true story, Franco, playing the lead role of high-profile “gay rights” activist Michael Glatze, is shown reading “The Marketing of Evil” during the pivotal scene in which Glatze publicly renounces his “gay” identification and reveals he wants to live for God. The real-life Glatze, who left the homosexual lifestyle in 2007 and become a happily married Christian pastor, has said reading “The Marketing of Evil” played a significant role in helping him in his dramatic personal journey.

That’s all – except to say I’ve arranged to have the price dropped to its lowest ever, lower then Amazon, low enough for anyone wanting a few extra copies to give to friends and loved ones (like maybe for Christmas).

Thank you!

David Kupelian, Vice President and Managing Editor of WND, Editor of Whistleblower magazine, author of “The Marketing of Evil,” “How Evil Works” and “The Snapping of the American Mind”

SPECIAL OFFER: Get David Kupelian’s “The Marketing of Evil” in paperback for just $9.99!

And get “The Marketing of Evil” AUDIOBOOK – read by the author – for the super-discounted price of $9.99 (reduced from $27.99)!

Also, get the acclaimed sequel, “How Evil Works,” as well as his latest blockbuster, “The Snapping of the American Mind: Healing a Nation Broken by a Lawless Government and Godless Culture.”

Follow David Kupelian on Facebook.

Original here

Chick-fil-A Should Take A Lesson From The Salvation Army And Stop Bowing To The LGBT Left

In the left’s crusade against the Christian faith, it harms the people it purports to defend. This means good people must ensure no one in need is left behind, and for the record, The Salvation Army is very good people.

Chick-fil-A Should Take A Lesson From The Salvation Army And Stop Bowing To The LGBT Left

Nov 21, 2019 by By Chad Felix Greene

Chick-fil-A stated Monday that starting at the beginning of the year it will no longer donate to The Salvation Army, to which the restaurant franchise gave $115,000 in 2018. This decision came shortly after LGBT groups pressured Chick-fil-A into closing its first location in the United Kingdom.

Chick-fil-A was accused of donating money to, as CNN reported, “anti-LGBTQ” organizations, including The Salvation Army. GLAAD, an LGBT organization, argued LGBT people should “greet today’s announcement with cautious optimism,” while LGBTQ Nation dismissed the change as merely a PR move to make more money. The accusation of The Salvation Army as an “anti-LGBTQ” organization, however, requires a deeper dive.

If you read The Salvation Army’s page dedicated to LGBT concerns, you might imagine it was from any major LGBT advocacy website. The first posted statement concerns housing obstacles for some LGBT people. It states, “Because LGBTQ Americans living in poverty often experience unacceptable homophobia and transphobia, many become homeless.”

Arguing that nearly one-third of transgender people have been rejected from homeless shelters around the country, The Salvation Army provides details about a dorm in Las Vegas it built specifically to help this vulnerable group. Their messaging addresses substance abuse, access to food, job training, and suicide prevention.

Stating that a donation to its cause can provide three nights of shelter, the charity assures the reader, “When a transgender person seeks help from us, we serve them in the same manner as any other person seeking assistance.” It even offers rental and utility assistance, arguing on behalf of LGBT Americans, which it states are more likely to be poor.

This information is not buried deep within the website, either, to be found only through dedicated searching. On its What We Do page, The Salvation Army includes “Serving the LGBTQ Community” right alongside “Love the Elderly” and “Stop Domestic Abuse.” It clearly communicates that the burdens of LGBT people in need are just as urgent and important as everyone else’s.

Pop Culture Clashes with The Salvation Army

Yet British singer Ellie Goulding recently told her fans she would refuse to participate in the Dallas Cowboys versus Buffalo Bills game on Thanksgiving Day, sponsored by The Salvation Army, saying, “[S]upporting an anti-LGBTQ charity is clearly not something I would ever intentionally do.” Goulding previously worked with The Salvation Army and posted on her Instagram the work she had done.

She did so with pride. It was only after fans began inundating her with outrage that she changed her position. One fan lamented, “A little disappointed considering the salvation army has a long standing history of anti lgbtq+ rhetoric. i appreciate the positive things they do but there are other, better organizations that don’t discriminate against others.” Another said, “They only help *certain* people. Very homophobic, transphobic, anti-LGBTQIA+ organization. Please do your research before endorsing a company that continues to hurt our community.”

Goulding gave The Salvation Army an ultimatum. “Upon researching this, I have reached out to The Salvation Army and said that I would have no choice but to pull out unless they very quickly make a solid, committed pledge or donation to the LGBTQ community,” she said.

Jon Rich, a Salvation Army commander in the area serving the upcoming football game, quickly responded: “It brings attention to how inclusive we are as an organization and serving everyone no matter who they are, what their sexual orientation is, what their station in life is. We serve without discrimination.” After reaching out to Goulding and reassuring her of The Salvation Army’s equal treatment of all people, she agreed to do the show.

The Salvation Army Northern Division FAQ page provides insight, addressing concerns related to how it engages with LGBT people. The page firmly states, “Any person who comes through our doors will receive assistance based on their need and our capacity to help.”

The organization investigates and takes action in cases of alleged discrimination. It has spent $300,000 on diverse lobbying efforts in the last two decades, 0.0009 percent of its income. As Rich stated regarding same-sex employees, “Now, nationwide we offer health benefits to same-sex couples, no questions asked.” He continued, “But we think everyone should have access to healthcare. So why wouldn’t we do that?”

LGBT Media Goes After the Salvation Army Regardless

Despite this overwhelming assurance that The Salvation Army in no way endorses or engages in discrimination or hatred toward LGBT people, LGBT media overwhelming include it in lists of “anti-LGBT” organizations. ThinkProgress in 2019 argued, “The Salvation Army has a long record of opposing legal protections for LGBTQ Americans.” The Huffington Post cited the same reasoning, “The Salvation Army, which has an extensive record of anti-LGBTQ advocacy.”

Transgender activist Zinnia Jones published a list of the organization’s anti-LGBTQ history on the Huffington Post back in 2013, and it has been referenced ever since. The list begins in 1986 and covers the organization worldwide, which is active in 130 countries.

The official list includes five examples. In 1986, the New Zealand Salvation Army helped collect signatures to oppose a law that would decriminalize homosexuality and issued an official apology in 2008. In 1998 a branch in San Francisco chose to turn down money from the city that included a requirement to provide benefits to employees with same-sex partners.

In 2000, the Salvation Army of Scotland submitted a letter to Parliament opposing the teaching of homosexuality in public schools. In 2001, the U.S. branch lobbied to protect religious institutions from being held liable under anti-discrimination policies. The Salvation Army addressed this, saying, “[T]he effort was solely focused on allowing our clergy and those involved in our religious activities to work on federally funded social service programs without having to compromise core religious beliefs.”

In 2012, the only stated accusation of discrimination, Danielle Morantez, a case worker for the office in Burlington, Vermont, claimed she was fired after coming out as bisexual. The story’s latest update appeared in 2012 on the GLAAD website. Jones recognized then that The Salvation Army had already set up pro-LGBT pages and removed reportedly offensive information on its site.

Confusion Over Biblical Teaching on Sexuality

Also in 2012, a controversy arose, as the Washington Blade reported, “[A] Salvation Army spokesperson told an interviewer that gay people deserve death, according to scripture.” The Salvation Army addressed this as well, stating, “The officer was responding to a question about a Bible passage which most Christians understand to be a discussion of spiritual death, meaning a separation from God, their creator.” The organization widely condemned the statements shortly after the interview was reported.

Essentially, the issue for LGBT activists, despite the information the organization has provided over the last two decades, is as Jones puts it, “These statements completely ignore the reality that the Salvation Army continues to maintain anti-gay theological stances.”

Time and time again, the biblical belief system of the organization itself comes up as a fundamental argument used to demonstrate the hatred and bigotry the organization represents: “The Salvation Army states clearly they believe, The Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments were given by inspiration of God, and that they only constitute the Divine rule of Christian faith and practice.” For many on the left, this alone is enough to dismiss the organization as hateful.

In 2013 Jones made the plea, “Supporting the Salvation Army this season, whether by tossing your change in their red kettles or donating your used goods to their resale shops, means assisting an aggressively anti-gay church in furthering its goals of discrimination.”

In 2018, LGBT author James Finn wrote, “Did you know that when you give money to the Salvation Army, you’re giving money to a church? Did you know that the Church is viciously homophobic and transphobic, fighting all over the world for the right to discriminate against LGBTQ people?” This reasoning, in part, motivated Noah Michelson to pen his 2018 Huffington Post article titled “If You Really Love LGBTQ People, You Just Can’t Keep Eating Chick-fil-A.”

The Good Guys Shouldn’t Bow to the Outrage Mob

Regardless of the factual information, the context of several decades, scattered accusations firmly condemned by the core organization, and the open welcoming of LGBT people, all that matters for the left is the idea of Christian faith behind it all. As CNN reported, “The Salvation Army has said in the past that the Bible forbids sexual intimacy between members of the same sex, that gay Christians should embrace celibacy and that scripture does not support same-sex marriages.” This on its own seems enough to justify the left’s hatred.

The thing about attempting to appease those who hate you is that whatever you do will only deepen their suspicion of you. As GLAAD’s director of campaigns and rapid response Drew Anderson cautioned, “In addition to refraining from financially supporting anti-LGBTQ organizations, Chick-fil-A still lacks policies to ensure safe workplaces for LGBTQ employees and should unequivocally speak out against the anti-LGBTQ reputation that their brand represents.” It will never be enough when the opposition views you as a threat based on what they think you believe rather than on what you express to the world.

Christians should follow The Salvation Army’s lead and continue to stand for their faith while speaking to the accusations against them and opening their arms as they would anyway. But we cannot underestimate the power of propaganda and simply hope Chick-fil-A realizes the mistake it has made. The Salvation Army argued, “When misinformation is perpetuated without fact, our ability to serve those in need, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, religion or any other factor, is at risk.”

In the left’s crusade against the Christian faith it refuses to understand or tolerate, it harms the people it claims to defend and protect. This means good people must step up to ensure no one in need is left behind in the meantime, and for the record, The Salvation Army is very good people.

Chad Felix Greene is a senior contributor to The Federalist. He is the author of the “Reasonably Gay: Essays and Arguments” series and is a social writer focusing on truth in media, conservative ideas and goals, and true equality under the law. You can follow him on Twitter @chadfelixg.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/11/21/chick-fil-a-should-take-a-lesson-from-the-salvation-army-and-stop-bowing-to-the-lgbt-left/


I am a Salvation Army volunteer, including for  Katrina, and a former Board Chairman and former Board member 

City sued for demanding photographer violate faith

Yet another fight over ‘nondiscrimination’ ordinances that promotes the LGBT minority

Nov 23, 2019

(Image courtesy Pixabay)

 

Stop me if you’ve heard this one.

Oh wait, you HAVE heard this one.

Because it’s happening all over.

The newest situation where a local “nondiscrimination” demand is creating issues because of its claim to be able to force Christians to violate their faith in order to do business comes from Louisville, Kentucky.

Such situation already have erupted in Oregon, New Mexico, Colorado, California and dozens of other locations. Bakers, photographers, florists, video makers and calligraphers have been targeted, so far.

The situation, according to the Alliance Defending Freedom, which is working on behalf of photographer Chelsey Nelson and her Chelsey Nelson Photography, is that “Louisville law … forces her to use her artistic talents to promote same-sex wedding ceremonies if she photographs and blogs about weddings between one man and one woman.”

“The Louisville law also forbids [her] from publicly explaining to clients and potential clients through her studio’s own website or social media sites the religious reasons why she only celebrates wedding ceremonies between one man and one woman. Louisville considers such ‘communications’ as indicating that services will be denied or that someone’s patronage would be ‘objectionable, unwelcome, unacceptable, or undesirable’ because of sexual orientation,” ADF reported.

It was the U.S. Supreme Court that created the dispute, when it fabricated several years ago the idea of same-sex marriage. That opinion, according to the chief justice, was unrelated to the Constitution.

The opinion purported to assure Americans that those who believe in traditional marriage, a foundation of society for millennia, still would be protected. But Justice Samuel Alita, at the time, wasn’t convinced.

“I assume that those who cling to old beliefs will be able to whisper their thoughts in the recesses of their homes, but if they repeat those views in public, they will risk being labeled as bigots and treated as such by governments, employers, and schools,” he warned.

That’s what’s happening, according to the new case.

Explained Kate Anderson, senior counsel for the ADF, “Artists shouldn’t be censored, fined, or forced out of business simply for disagreeing with the government’s preferred views,. The government must allow artists the freedom to make personal decisions about what art they can and can’t create.

“No matter one’s views on marriage, we all lose when bureaucrats can force citizens to participate in religious ceremonies they oppose or to speak messages they disagree with. On countless other topics, photographers and other artists can freely choose the stories they tell. Chelsey simply asks for the same freedom.”

Officials for Louisville declined to respond to a WND request for comment.

The ADF said its action is a “pre-enforcement challenge,” which lets citizens raise objections to city threats to their rights.

“The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit and the Arizona Supreme Court recently ruled in favor of artists and filmmakers who brought similar pre-enforcement challenges against laws like Louisville’s. ADF attorneys are asking the court to halt enforcement of the law against Nelson and her business while her lawsuit proceeds,” the ADF said.

“Every American, including photographers and writers, should be free to peacefully live and work according to their faith without fear of unjust punishment by the government,” added ADF Senior Counsel Jonathan Scruggs. “Chelsey serves all people. But Louisville is trying to compel Chelsey’s speech, force her participation in ceremonies she objects to, and eliminate her editorial control over her photographs and blog. It’s unlawful to coerce an artist to create messages against her will and intimidate her into silence just because the city disagrees with her beliefs.”

The case is pending in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky.

It explains the city law violates the U.S. Constitution, including the First Amendment’s Free Speech and Free Exercise clauses.

ADF said, “The complaint indicates that an online directory lists 91 photographers in Louisville and 314 photographers in Kentucky who will photograph same-sex weddings—many of whom express support for same-sex marriage by posting statements promoting same-sex marriage on their websites and by displaying photographs of same-sex weddings on their websites, blogs, and social media sites.”

There have been at least 15 cases – based on the 2015 Obergefell decision by the U.S. Supreme that established a right to same-sex marriage – in which Christians have been prosecuted for running their wedding-related businesses according to the principles of their faith.

That’s even though that original opinion claimed to assure: “Many who deem same-sex marriage to be wrong reach that conclusion based on decent and honorable religious or philosophical premises, and neither they nor their beliefs are disparaged here.”

 

Original here