Christians and conservatives: BEWARE the new "Equality Act"...

in infromationwar •  5 years ago  (edited)

There is NOTHING about promoting "equality" in the latest piece of monstrous LBGTJCNSKFGWWJBASXCZC nonsense being pushed forward in our increasingly radicalized Congress.

As per typical, at least since 911 and the laughably-named "USA Patriot Act," almost every piece of major societal-impacting legislation is getting named FOR EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of what the real result of the legislation will be. (Does this remind anyone of Demonrat transference of the type we so with them calling "collusion" while they were busy colluding deeply with the Russian communists?) In other words, we are already entering the period of "universal deceit" about which so many dystopian writers of eras gone by sought to warn us.


(Image courtesy of harlemonestop.com.)

Check out this link:

https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/faith-and-morals/item/31845-equality-act-seeks-federal-persecution-of-christians

Here is an excerpt from the link above:

"Democrats in Congress are pushing 'equality' legislation that critics say would criminalize Christianity, Islam, and Judaism by forcing virtually every institution in society — including religious institutions — to hire, serve, and promote homosexuals and individuals confused about their gender. A number of analysts have warned that by enshrining 'sexual orientation' in the statute, even pedophilia and pederasty could be protected. In the House of Representatives, Democrats already have more than enough co-sponsors to pass the bill. And in the Senate, they are getting very close. But a massive coalition of critics from across the political spectrum and a broad array of religious traditions is rising up to stop it before it is too late.

Among other changes, the so-called Equality Act, also known as H.R. 5 in the House and S. 788 in the Senate, purports to 'prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation.' To do that, it would enshrine actual or perceived 'sexual orientation and gender identity' into federal statutes. That would give homosexuality, transgenderism, and other perversions of human sexuality and gender the same protections as race or sex in employment, housing, public accommodations, and more. Incredibly, the legislation specifically states that religious freedom may not be used as a defense under the bill."

Clearly, the intent of this bill--specifically as it proscribes religious freedom and freedom of association--is to set up a preferred class whose views can never be challenged, or from which dissenters of those views can not ever or anywhere escape. There is no "equality" anywhere in this legislation. It ought to be titled the "homosexual and transgendered superior rights act," because that is what its effects will be--setting up a superior class of citizens who enjoy their exalted status BECAUSE OF THEIR PERVERSE CHOSEN BEHAVIORS and not, as is the case with the American black population, for example, because of any inherent physical attribute that people of ill will might target.

Unlike previous departures from eons of human rational thought and action, this bill is so messed up, even many liberal-leaning groups are lining up to oppose it. That does NOT mean we can let out guard down, however, as the REAL POWER behind the thrones of this world (and his most influential underlings in the global billionaire pedo club) are pushing ti forward with religious zeal. Check this next excerpt:

"The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has also come out against the move, saying it would impose 'sweeping regulations to the detriment of society as a whole. The act’s definitions alone would remove women and girls from protected legal existence,' the Catholic leaders said, warning that the bill seeks to regulate thought, belief, and speech in an 'unprecedented' departure from America's founding principles. 'Furthermore, the act also fails to recognize the difference between the person — who has dignity and is entitled to recognition of it — and the actions of a person, which have ethical and social ramifications. Conflating the two will introduce a plethora of further legal complications.'

The bill is so radical and extreme that even some Democrats such as Senator Joe Manchin (D-W.V.) and homosexual activists such as Gregory Angelo, former leader of the homosexual 'Log Cabin Republicans,' are opposed to it. 'Don’t be fooled by the name: The Equality Act is legislation that would compromise American civil rights and religious liberty as we know it,' wrote Angelo in a piece for the Washington Examiner. 'All reasonable Americans, especially gay Americans who support pluralism and tolerance, should oppose it'."

Sadly, we wouldn't have such abominations as so-called "gay marriage" or "transgendered-friendly public bathrooms" if liberals like these had joined with conservatives in earlier fights to defeat them. These exist, because the radical LGBTDHSJFUSMVHSKFL activists always take advantage of the common Christian kindness and attempts by the unwary to be "tolerant and compassionate" to agendas they never recognized (in time) for the pure evil they truly are.


(Image courtesy of thoughtco.com.)

Without the "tolerance-of-evil" environment which now dominates post-Christian America, those earlier travesties would have not been possible, setting up the framework needed for this final coup de grace to organized religious (and commonsense) resistance to the most radical of the anti-family, and anti-religious agendas know to modern man.

If you haven't already call your Congressional representatives and urge them to defeat these bills!

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Soft targits first. Anybody who expressed a gender preference in a dating website. Maybe lockup all non same sex married senatars until they give up the 50% of them that must have used gender discrimination when selecting there partners.

Any changes to constitutional protections must be judged by strict scrutiny application, I have my doubts this will survive strict scrutiny. The government must prove it has a compelling interest to altar constitutional protections, such as national security, saving lives, or an act put into place that would protect constitutional protections in place...but these have to be crucial and not just something preferred, nor can they be overly broad, the least restrictive path would have to be found. What is happening here is that by applying the rules to everyone and exempting even a religious defense is they are under the impression that is the least restrictive when in essence it's not, it's stripping the constitutional rights of one group in favor of another, that restriction is aimed at a specific group regardless if they mandate the groups as a whole, when the court has ruled in favor of interfering to the detriment of religious liberties it has always held to be in matters of a compelling interest, crucial, meaning more harm would come than good by upholding a religious liberty. In order to do so it would seem they would have to wade into the debate exactly how gender identify would be defined, whether scientifically it's something someone is born with or a preferred lifestyle, would it be permissible to just take a wild guess what side the debate is right especially given what's at stake. This is more a preferred action, we'd prefer you allow men to compete in sports against women, we'd prefer a minister be forced to marry same sex couples, we'd prefer, prefer, prefer.