Tag Archives: gay rights

Selective Application of Tolerance

640px-Westerkerk_-_Gay_symbols_2

Tolerance is a virtue. But to be a positive force in a nation, or a community, it must be applied universally, not selectively. Definitionally, it denotes not only forbearance of behavior, but of opinions that are disagreed with. Yet the degree of intolerance shown to those who oppose the radical homosexual agenda is immensely disturbing, especially coming from those who are such ardent advocates of toleration.

Those who oppose the leftist agenda are often subjected to threats, obscene anonymous phone calls, character assassination, and disturbing mischaracterizations in social media for having the courage to express their opinions.

A courageous couple, Ralph and Rochelle Lillig of Pocatello, ID, have felt the wrath and intolerance of the radical left. And what is the heinous injustice the Lilligs are guilty of? They have the chutzpah to suggest the citizens of their town exercise their right to vote on whether to accept a proposed “anti-discrimination” ordinance that criminalizes any perceived discrimination against homosexuals or transgenders. Encouraging democratic involvement is fundamental to the American tradition. The Lilligs should be lauded for advancing the notion that their community should actually have a direct voice in the laws the citizens are beholden to, rather than just leaving it in the hands of elected officials, some of whom have proven susceptible to coercive pressure from a small yet vocal minority.

640px-Westerkerk_-_Gay_symbols_2There is a local group that calls itself 2Great4Hate, which is supporting the ordinance. They are exercising their freedom of speech to advance their agenda. They are not being vilified for doing so. So why do they display such intolerance to the Lilligs for exercising their freedom of speech? It would appear that the left’s version of tolerance is very selective and exclusive. I was unceremoniously ostracized from their Facebook group because I failed to comport with their selective concept of “tolerance.” Apparently it’s not enough to simply oppose any form of discrimination, but one must accept the entirety of their narrow, codified version of it, regardless of the unintended consequences.

The left’s version of tolerance obviously excludes social conservatives who have the temerity to support the nuclear family, and broad exercise of freedom of speech. This was made painfully clear by their reaction to Chik-Fil-A last year when the company CEO revealed they were supportive of the traditional nuclear family. The left’s reaction evidenced a selective tolerance disorder, where it’s not enough to merely advocate treating others the way you want to be treated, but you have to buy into their precise agenda of forced acceptance of aberrance, deviancy, and codified enforcement.

As a principle, and a characteristic to be aspired, tolerance is antithetical to ideological conformity. If tolerance is publicly demanded of behavioral and ideological aberrance, it should likewise be extended toward people of contrarian values. Freedom of speech and expression should be absolutes for all citizens and groups, not proscribed for those who believe differently. Applying a common aphorism, if it’s good for the goose, it’s good for the gander.

It’s disconcerting when the primary means of advancing a particular agenda is verbal guerilla warfare of intimidation and personal attacks against those who have the audacity to disagree with them. It smacks of a fascistic tyranny of the minority by attempted intimidation of nonconformists.

I was critical of Attorney General Eric Holder when he claimed that we’re a “nation of cowards” for not addressing racial issues to his liking. But it’s no wonder we’re becoming a nation of cowards, since whenever someone has the courage to exercise their First Amendment rights of free speech and it doesn’t conform with the left, they get vilified and publicly excoriated. That doesn’t seem very “tolerant” to me.

Christopher Hitchens, the secularist and author of “God is not Great” said in a New York Post interview, “More and more I find that those people are the real enemy intellectually. There’s no dishonesty like liberal dishonesty, just like there’s no intolerance like liberal intolerance. There’s nothing they won’t excuse and no excuse they won’t deploy. Their piety is a big aspect of that.”

The ultimate hypocrisy is to claim adherence to a standard of behavior yet fail to hold oneself accountable to that standard. If tolerance is a noble virtue to which our society must aspire, it must be applied universally, not just demanded of those who believe differently by those who have so little to spare. The bigotry and churlish behavior exhibited by the left on these kinds of issues should be sufficient to give any sentient person cause to spurn not only their conduct, but their agenda.

Tolerance is “the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.” It doesn’t mean we have to agree, but it does require civility and mutual respect, in spite of perceived differences. It’s a worthy virtue to aspire to collectively as a society. But to have any collective efficacy, it must be applied universally, not selectively.

AP award winning columnist Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, Idaho and is a graduate of Idaho State University with degrees in Political Science and History and former member of the Idaho State Journal Editorial Board.  He can be reached at [email protected].

 

Should Cleveland Boy Scouts cave In to United Way gay rights agenda

United Way of Greater Cleveland strips Greater Cleveland Council of the Boy Scouts of America $97,251 funding

When President Obama decided to announce in May his embrace of gay marriage he opened the gate for his political sideline gay supporters and liberal like-minded non-profit funders to weed out organizations that support traditional family values. They zeroed their targets on the Boy Scouts, because of its refusal to cave in to the demands of liberals and gay activists to change their traditional values and biblically-based beliefs.

This was not unique for the organization to stand firm on its 100 plus year-old legacy. In fact it took a June 28th, 2000 “Boy Scouts of America et al. v. Dale” decision from the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold the Boy Scouts of America’s right of freedom of association . The decision sanctioned the group’s right to set its own standards for both membership as well as leadership.

But with a wink and a nod from President Obama’s embrace of gay marriage in May of this year, the liberal gay activists were emboldened to decimate the Boy Scouts’ legal Supreme Court constitutionally supported rights. They moved with all deliberate speed to defund organizations, and set their eyes on Cleveland, Ohio’s 100 year old plus organization.

On Tuesday, September 25th, the United Way of Greater Cleveland notified the Greater Cleveland Council of the Boy Scouts of America (GCC) that their $97,251 funding was going to be stripped. This vindictive action would affect 16,000 youth that are served in Cuyahoga and Summit Counties in the Cleveland area, according to the GCC.

Not only that, but, this defunding would critically and adversely, affect the lives of 1,500 at risk low income children in the City of Cleveland, admitted Boy Scout program aide Wardell Cooper, to WKYC-TV News, on Tuesday, September 25th. Cooper, himself, has increased Boy Scout participation in his area of Cleveland from 9 scouts to dozens. That translates into dozens of kids with new hope, who are off of the street and involved in constructive community activities.

The overriding mandated objective of the gay rights agenda is crystal clear to parents of boy scouts and to their supporters. To receive funding, the organization must both abandon their moral principles and adopt the new liberal order or the funder will decimate the children’s future… constitution or no constitution. So there you have it, As of June 30th, 2013, the United Way of Greater Cleveland will eliminate and potentially decimate the opportunity of children, and especially those in many Cleveland urban neighborhoods.

Where are the civil rights advocates from the churches and from the neighborhoods and from the state or the nation who will fight for the children who were engaged in decent law abiding activities? Certainly no support will be forthcoming from the NAACP.

The NAACP has already been bought and sold and peddled their credibility down the river. This summer the organization’s 64-member board adopted a resolution to support gay marriage and tie it to rights guaranteed blacks by the 14th Amendment. So as one can see, the children do not have an advocate in an organization that has sold the children’s future out for 30 pieces of silver from Obama and his gay rights supporters.

But this is the time for parents and advocates of constitutionally protected freedom of association to stand firm! They have to support not only these young boy scouts, but all children who are being forced to subjugate their rights for a political morally challenged purpose.

Ignore the president’s abandonment of the rule of law. Ignore the wails and the ridicule of the LGBT side which seeks to openly delegitimize your embrace of America’s tradition of marriage being between a man and a woman. This is one nation under God and not one nation under Obama!

Where do you draw the line for your family or your children’s future?

Do you draw it at the state border? Do you draw it at the city gate? Do you draw it at the neighborhood line? Do you draw it at your neighbor’s fence? Do you wait until your child no longer has a future? Founding father Benjamin Franklin said in 1759 “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Your children deserve better!

Cleveland’s Boy Scouts are not the first nor will they be the last group to come under the steel jack boot of gay rightist assaults. This should not be a fight to discriminate, rather it is a fight to support founding principles, and not be bullied, threatened, assaulted and stripped of your selfhood.

The red line in the sand is in Cleveland, and it is in any and every town where United Way non-profit funders and their like organizations work to tear down America’s traditional values. When they move to defund a Boy Scouts group, move to defund the funders. Withdraw from their automatic payroll deduction fundraising drives. Examine their big money donors and withdraw your support for their businesses, organizations and services.

When tyranny from any corner of this nation rears its head, it must be met with resistance and not apology, with strength and not appeasement, and with moral discipline and not abdication. This nation’s future is based upon protecting America’s national treasure: its youth.

The Cleveland Boy Scouts and similar Boy Scout organizations around the nation do not need sympathy nor do they need empathy; they need your financial support to continue to assist their stand on principle.

You can support the Greater Cleveland Council of Boy Scouts of America by going to www.gccbsa.org or make checks payable to Greater Cleveland Council, BSA, at 2241 Woodland Ave, Cleveland, Ohio 44115.

This is not the end. Parents, you are the first line of defense for your children’s future. As President Abraham Lincoln said in his address to Congress, December 3, 1861, “The struggle of today is not altogether for today — it is for a vast future also. With a reliance on Providence, all the more firm and earnest, let us proceed in the great task which events have devolved upon us.”

Do not let these current events control your children’s future. Join the struggle to insure that there is a tomorrow for your children!

Let me know what you think:  ( Click )

 

 

NBC is Run By Heathens: GOP Sunday Morning Debate Recap

Two Republican debates within 12 hours of each other are enough to make even the biggest political junkie fatigued.  Sunday morning saw the follow up to the Saturday night ABC debate (Worst. Debate. Ever.) hosted by NBC and Facebook and moderated by David “Why are all Republicans racist, capitalist pigs” Gregory.  Apparently the heathens at NBC don’t attend church. Surprising? Hardly.

This debate was much, much better than Saturday night’s martini fueled disaster (there was some question as to Sawyer’s sobriety), although that is not due to Gregory’s moderating, that much is sure.  I won’t delve too much into Gregory’s liberal bias. We all know and understand where he’s coming from.  It is no surprise that all his questions were thinly veiled “gotcha” questions so let’s not waste time on that.  What was surprising is that the candidates seemed much more alert and enthused at this early morning debate than the previous night.  With the possible exception of Jon Huntsman everyone on the stage looked alert and ready to rumble. Huntsman looked quite tired. I can’t blame him. He’s staked everything on a New Hampshire surge and I’m quite sure he spent the better part of the night boning up for this last debate before the primary votes are counted. Huntsman look tired, but he sounded more enthused than in any previous debates I can remember. He even reached out to attack Romney once or twice and clearly David Gregory and NBC want Huntsman to make a splash in New Hampshire. He is in last place in every poll but was offered more time screen time than most of the other candidates and certainly more than he’s received in debates thus far.

The real surprise this morning was Rick Perry. Saturday night he looked good, but Sunday morning he looked great. Perry is obviously staking his ground as the last “outsider” in the field and it seems to have reenergized him.  He refused to be sucked into the gotcha questions and succinctly expressed his opinion that big government and socialist policies have been destroying America for far to long.  Perry was also the only in the field Sunday morning to consistently remind voters that Obama is a socialist. Mr. Gregory didn’t like that. He offered Perry very few turns to speak.

Rick Santorum was much better than his very decent Saturday night performance. Perhaps his best line came when asked what he would do if his son told him he was gay (insert eye roll here). Santorum responded, “I would love him just as much as I did the second before he told me.” What a dumb question. It made me wonder if the moderator from New Hampshire has any children. As a voter I was most curious to see how he would address the right to work issue, as he had voted against it while in the Senate. He was offered the opportunity and explained that he voted against the legislation in the Senate because Pennsylvania was not a right to work state and he did not wish to give Washington D.C. the power to determine Pennsylvania state law. Its up to the voters to decide if that answer was satisfactory.

While each candidate did take a turn at jabbing Romney, the only one that really went for the throat was Gingrich, predictably. Newt is mad about Romney’s super pac attack ads and he has vowed to take down Romney accordingly.  At this point a Gingrich win seems unlikely, but the remaining candidates will probably owe him a debt of gratitude when this is all over, since no one else is willing to go for Mitt’s jugular.

There was the typical line of questioning about gay rights and gay marriage because as we all know Republican primary voters are very concerned about that. Somewhere along the way two New Hampshire news personalities (I use that term lightly) showed up to self-righteously grill the candidates about why they are such cruel, racist, classist, sexist homophobes.  They fit right in with David Gregory. Why do we let people like this moderate GOP debates? It does little to illuminate the real issues REPUBLICAN voters are concerned with.

Saturday night’s debate was a true and complete disaster.  Sunday morning’s debate was slightly more dignified, but it was the performance of the candidates that elevated it in the end.  Clearly these men are sensing that the final push is on.  Perry seems to have finally awoken and is depending on a very good showing in South Carolina to garner the next GOP surge, which will be bad news for Santorum if he pulls it off.  Tuesday’s primary in New Hampshire will be very telling.  I look forward to putting a fine point on some of these races… but please, no more Sunday morning debates. Especially from the East Coast. Some of us on the Left Coast actually enjoy sleeping past 5:30 a.m. on the weekends.

 

crossposted at kiradavis.net