LGBT Activists Arm For Further War On Free Speech

[Baruch]

The effort is being spearheaded by billionaire hedge fund manager Paul Singer and another wealthy hedge fund manager, Tim Gill. Gill’s operations—the Gill Foundation and Gill Action—have been dedicated to “nonpartisan” gains for the LGBT lobby on the legislative and judicial fronts. But with an expected federal win for gay marriage from the Supreme Court, the LGBT movement is poised to shift its focus to policing speech in the workplace, schools, businesses, and public squares across America.

The blurb doesn't do this article justice. Look at Canada: that's our future. Big money is behind the LGBT lobby. They don't know and/or care that they are tools of an authoritarian regime. Neither, it seems, does a significant number of civilians see what is happening. It's not a good thing for anybody but the authoritarians and their devilish father. The author does a superb job of pulling in the many threads and zeroing in on the true agenda.

I give thanks to our Father who is always in control, but it bodes ill for any who stand against Him. I take no pleasure in knowing that every lofty effort of man eventually ends in destruction, but it is a certainty. I pray that many can be plucked from the fire.

Source: http://thefederalist.com/2015/05/20/...n-free-speech/

[Lou Newton]

The blurb doesn't do this article justice. Look at Canada: that's our future. Big money is behind the LGBT lobby. They don't know and/or care that they are tools of an authoritarian regime. Neither, it seems, does a significant number of civilians see what is happening. It's not a good thing for anybody but the authoritarians and their devilish father. The author does a superb job of pulling in the many threads and zeroing in on the true agenda.

I give thanks to our Father who is always in control, but it bodes ill for any who stand against Him. I take no pleasure in knowing that every lofty effort of man eventually ends in destruction, but it is a certainty. I pray that many can be plucked from the fire.

Source: http://thefederalist.com/2015/05/20/...n-free-speech/

Thanks Barry,

The article goes into what the LGBT has in store for their next step. But it fails to address where they are really headed.

We need look no further than Genesis to see where they are headed:

Genesis 19
Sodom and Gomorrah Destroyed

1 The two angels arrived at Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of the city. When he saw them, he got up to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground.
2 "My lords," he said, "please turn aside to your servant's house. You can wash your feet and spend the night and then go on your way early in the morning." "No," they answered, "we will spend the night in the square."
3 But he insisted so strongly that they did go with him and entered his house. He prepared a meal for them, baking bread without yeast, and they ate.
4Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom--both young and old--surrounded the house.
5 They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them."
6 Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him
7 and said, "No, my friends. Don't do this wicked thing.
8 Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don't do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof."
9 "Get out of our way," they replied. And they said, "This fellow came here as an alien, and now he wants to play the judge! We'll treat you worse than them." They kept bringing pressure on Lot and moved forward to break down the door.
10 But the men inside reached out and pulled Lot back into the house and shut the door.
11 Then they struck the men who were at the door of the house, young and old, with blindness so that they could not find the door.
12 The two men said to Lot, "Do you have anyone else here--sons-in-law, sons or daughters, or anyone else in the city who belongs to you? Get them out of here,
13because we are going to destroy this place. The outcry to the LORD against its people is so great that he has sent us to destroy it."

This is where homosexuality leads. They not only want to FORCE everyone to accept homosexuality, they want to FORCE everyone to be homosexual.

No one can do the things they do without feeling shame and humiliation. For that it what the behavior is about. Studies show that about 97% of them take part in oral anal sex. That is Satan humiliating them.

But they feel it is everyone who is not homosexual that is humiliating them, so they want to force everyone to be homosexual so they can not look down on them. This is what was taking place in Sodom.

NOTICE that ALL the men came to Lot's house. Every single man had already been forced to take part in this behavior, including Lot. No one was allowed into Sodom without this initiation taking place, even Angels.

God does not destroy a city for a small offense. Sodom was the most evil city on the face of the earth.

That is why Abraham was not interested in going there, or even touching a shoelace of the King of Sodom, even though the valley was full of green grass for his lambs. The place was a violent and filthy place. Lot made a foolish choice, just as this nation is now making a foolish choice.

Look what happened to Lot's descendants, they became the Moabites and the Ammonites. God did not allow them into His temple until 10 generations had passed, after they became part of Israel.

That is where every homosexual society ends up. In Sparta every male was FORCED to be homosexual at a very young age.

All one has to do is read their magazine, it admits they want to be able to force you to let them have sex with your young children.

The more power they are given the more people will join their ranks and become homosexual. That is how they took over Sodom and Sparta.

[Baruch]

Thanks for your response, Lou. Your points are something for all to ponder.

This post is primarily for unregistered readers.

In the secular frame of reference, the pro-LGBT individual would read a post like these and quickly conclude that it is "just more conservative discriminatory speech". But please, pro-LGBT person, try to break out of that; it is the summation of the meme manufactured to make it easy for the unthinking to defame and marginalize its opponent. Next consider that this movement has big money and big politics (and by extension, the media) backing it; and its engineers are well versed in social manipulation: it is their forte. This movement did not have popular support until big money, big politics, and the media gave it the platform. Before that, it had a minority voice.

Why should one take a step back to consider these things? Because no one knows it all. It is a wonderful feature of life that seeking and learning is a continual process, and truth unfolds.

We can see how the weaponization of LGBT must turn out by looking at an older model, Canada. "Weaponization" is a strong word, but in Canada it has been made a weapon in ways that civilians didn't believe possible. This thing is akin to looking at Europe as the model for creeping Shariah. This is Satan's dialectic approach. It's incremental, subtle, and insidious. It whittles away at foundations, deceiving and seducing until enough power is achieved that force can be used on the holdouts. As King Solomon said, "One sinner destroys much good." A little compromise creeps like rust, and eventually catches like fire. Indeed, in the Holy Bible the fall of mankind is portrayed as the result of one sinner.

People are easily led by the flesh: mind, emotions, senses, will. Whoever can manipulate these human attributes holds the reins. Yet there is enough slack in the fetters to convince the captives that they have freedom of mind, will, and movement. As long as one is comfortable with that why look outside of it? If one does not care to discover, let alone apply what's happening in Canada, then why even look at ancient Rome or Greece, or Sodom and Gomorrah as the model?

I don't pose these questions to you, Lou, or the other members of the forum, but to any who are in that position: on the fence or in the camp of pro-LGBT. They are important to think about, if one still fancies oneself a thinker.

The LGBT movement won't be content to stop until it is completely dominant. I wrote briefly before how the lobby used to call for equality and basic rights. As soon as the goal was achieved in the USA they kicked in the turbos. This, too, can be seen in a cursory study of Canada. It is like any power grab: once it rises to the sought level of accomplishment, it will proceed to increase its power base to protect itself from ever being unseated and it will do anything it can get away with to insure its success in expanding its power including the ideological, cultural, spiritual, and natural death of any opposition. This is not farfetched. Very many events, even in recent history, demonstrate this kind of thing in "civilization", so many that there shouldn't be a need to support the claim here. One sinner, much destruction.

If this sounds like personified evil, well yeah, it is. There is a collective human mind behind a social movement, and there are ruler spirits that give it power. It is the same power derived from belief in the lie that leads one to embrace rebellion: that God and His truth and righteousness are the enemy of personal freedom.

A good father does not hate his children. He loves them and dotes on them. He nurtures them, helps them to grow as individuals, lets them explore and learn and fail, and he picks them up and heals them, saves them from calamity. This is the God, or Father, that God-haters do not know. I confess that when you are estranged, you do not even recognize when He often does this for you. But He is never out of earshot, and He indulges them that would seek Him with an honest heart.

There are likely very many who think the gap between LGBT and God can never be bridged. There are obviously many who think God's truth must be compromised to provide a bridge, or reach a common ground.

In fact, there is a bridge: He is Jesus Christ. On one side is the world (Satan's kingdom), which God deems defiled land, darkness, and eternal desolation. On the other side is God's kingdom, which is holy ground, light, and eternal life. Where would you place the common ground in this picture? How does one compromise on the meaning of Holy?

Truly, the laws of the land, our nation, should reflect the righteous judgement of God. In doing so we invite His rich blessings. When the king, or president or prime minister and his retinue, rebels against the principles of God the people will suffer the curses.

"But," you may say, "we can come together and solve any problem that besets us!" Ok...like the LGBT and their backers are coming together to solve this problem? Is that goodness in action? The slavering power mongers backing LGBT are not doing this out of the goodness of their heart: no, there will be a huge payoff for them. I would ask Canadians if, in retrospect, their compromise was worth the loss of many freedoms and protections.

For the USA, time will tell. During a lull, read Romans chapter 1 for a preview.

[Baruch]

Huckabee: Gays 'Won't Stop Until There Are No More Churches' No More People 'Spreading the Gospel'

I don't know these guys, but I found the comments worth forwarding.

This manner of speech saddens me, "we tolerate one another". We are called to more than this. But given the space and editing, the comments are still pertinent.

Speaking about this to radio host Tony Perkins, who also is the president of the Family Research Council, Huckabee said, “Tony, this is bizarre and I think it’s a phony crisis. It’s been manufactured by the left, just as was the war on women. There was no war on women. The left has gotten very good at creating a crisis, something to divide the country, something to create the sense in which ‘we have to go after these conservatives because they’re trying to trample over our rights.’"
"It is a classic example of, really, a page out of 1984 when what things mean are the opposite of what they really are, and that’s what I’m seeing here," said Huckabee. "In the name of tolerance, there’s intolerance. In the name of diversity, there’s uniformity. In the name of acceptance, there’s true discrimination. It’s just bizarre. And the sad thing is a lot of these major companies and CEOs are just capitulating."


"Here’s what’s even sadder to me," he said. "A lot of the people in the political realm are just deciding that it’s easier to fold and quit than it is to fight. The result of that is we invite more of this. Nobody likes to have a fight, nobody likes to be hated. Sometimes you just have to stand up and say, you’re wrong on the issue and I’m not backing down because your facts are not facts. They’re fiction, and we’re not going to stop.’"

In response, Tony Perkins said, "The core principle of a civil society is that we all are different and we have different beliefs and different ideas, and we tolerate one another. The idea that you would go into a place of business that engages in – we’re talking about wedding vendors here – and force someone to do something that’s against their will instead of just saying, all right, I don’t agree with you and I don’t like that you don’t like what I’m doing but, you know what, I’m going to go next door to the other florist. Instead of doing that, what they’re doing is using the government to force somebody to engage in something. Now, some people will say it’s just this thing with same-sex weddings. No, actually, if as you pointed out earlier, where does this stop? Where will it stop?”

Source: http://cnsnews.com/blog/michael-w-ch...no-more-people

[Baruch]

This post is primarily for unregistered readers.

It occurred to me long afterwards that my meaning may have been unclear. I only meant by it that post #3 was written with unregistered readers in mind, not the whole topic. Even though I was not writing #3 to the members, members are always welcome to reply. If that's how you took then I'm grateful.

[Lou Newton]

It occurred to me long afterwards that my meaning may have been unclear. I only meant by it that post #3 was written with unregistered readers in mind, not the whole topic. Even though I was not writing #3 to the members, members are always welcome to reply. If that's how you took then I'm grateful.

I thought you meant for us to get lost. Just kidding.

I took it like you stated above Barry.

Lou

[Baruch]

I thought you meant for us to get lost. Just kidding.

I took it like you stated above Barry.

Lou

Haha. Thank you for the humor and assurance. Don't get lost, I'll have to come find you.