Posts Tagged ‘gay rights’

Deceptive Progressive Hype

March 30, 2015

Once again, we find progressives and the liberal media intentionally misleading the public. The current hype and furor over Indiana’s “Religious Freedom Law” is the latest in a long history of deliberate deception used to sway public opinion.

Indiana’s law simply says that no one can be forced to do something that is against their religion unless the state has a “compelling interest” to do so – and if one is compelled, the issue can be taken to the courts for a decision. This is not discriminatory or anti-gay. It just reaffirms one’s freedom of religion and it is very similar to laws already in place in 30 other states.

This law, like many other laws, could be misinterpreted and wrongly used in a discriminatory manner by nefarious individuals, but it is not discriminatory by itself and allows legal action to be taken if it used in that manner. Progressives know this but are deliberately misinterpreting the law to advance their agenda.

Unfortunately, this is a proven progressive tactic. It conditioned much of the public into believing decriminalization of marijuana is the same as legalization. It caused many to believe there really is a “war on women” and the police are all racists. It made immigration reform synonymous with amnesty and it convinced many that “access” to health insurance never existed for those unwilling to pay for it.

It is now trying to convince us that: Hillary did nothing wrong by erasing emails; Iran can be trusted with a nuclear program; Israel is the problem in the Middle East; Obama’s foreign policies have been successful; Obamacare is working well; Voter ID is voter suppression; and the economy is in great shape.

It is all liberal hype and it only works because both the White House and the mainstream media push it, repeating the hype over and over again until it becomes “fact”. It is nothing short of systematic brainwashing – the same brainwashing we saw in repressive countries and thought could never happen here.

If people continue voting to make history, hype will be all there is.

David J. Hentosh

Media Gay Population Debunked

July 16, 2014

The world according to Hollywood and the media has once again been found to be an illusion or, more correctly, propaganda. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention conducted the first large-scale government survey measuring American’s sexual orientation and found that less than 3% of the population identify themselves as gay.

Estimates as high as 30% have been repeatedly used to shame society into approval of homosexuality and to rationalize the re-definition of marriage. 97% of Americans live in fear of reprisals ranging from societal condemnation to loss of employment for merely voicing disapproval of 3% of the population’s lifestyle – because of a media agenda.

Movies and TV shows routinely present gay families and couples as being common and abundant. Respected organizations from the Boy Scouts to the Catholic Church are being condemned and pressured for refusing to change their structure and principles to accommodate only a portion of the 3% that may want to be included. Personal attacks against CEO’s and public figures voicing opinions based on religious beliefs have now become standard.

It is certainly admirable to care about and protect minorities, especially when they are subject to extreme discrimination and violence as gays have been. No one should be treated the way gays were once treated and it is the duty of any society to protect all individuals, even if it is only a few. We have done that but we are now on the proverbial “slippery slope”.

The re-defining of marriage is taking a toll on the foundation of the country: the family unit. We are now being demanded to celebrate gay marriage rather than accept it. There are some extremists advocating gay marriage for the purpose of destroying the institution of marriage altogether. We have opened the door far enough for some to publicly advocate the acceptance and normalization of incest and pedophilia in society.

The slippery slope does, indeed, exist and the media helped the 3% tail drag the entire dog onto that slope. The CDC survey should bring a more rational perspective.

David J. Hentosh

Playing ‘Chicken’ Backfires

August 2, 2012

In a display of solidarity supporting freedom of speech, patrons crowded many Chick-fil-A franchises on Wednesday in response to the unofficial “Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day”. Attempts to punish and financially harm the company’s president, Dan Cathy, for stating his opinion on gay marriage seem to have struck a chord with the “silent majority”. Perhaps it is more than just freedom of speech at play.

For years the gay community, joined by progressives, has accused all who disagree even slightly with any of their demands of being hateful, intolerant, or a homophobic. They have attacked loudly and forcefully in a game of “chicken” to see who would back down first. The majority of people have remained silent, refusing to play the game over many issues that, quite frankly, are not high on most priority lists.

Emboldened by that silence, the gay community quickly went from demanding tolerance to demanding acceptance to demanding approval and began using more aggressive tactics along the way. It seems that this game of “chicken” has backfired in the Chick-fil-A debacle.

It is not hateful to disapprove of homosexuality and it is not intolerant to want to keep the definition of marriage the way it has been for hundreds of years. It is, however, intolerant to refuse to accept that one can dislike homosexuality without hating the homosexual. Acting upon that disapproval, of course, is an entirely different matter, but expressing one’s opinion should not bring harmful attacks and labeling one hateful for doing so is wrong.

A line has been arrogantly crossed and it may have awakened a sleeping giant. If the giant stays awake long enough, it may decide to solidify all the lines and push back hard on those who have repeatedly crossed them. Hopefully, the giant will remain awake through November.

David J. Hentosh

Obama’s Paid Endorsement?

May 11, 2012

Regardless of anyone’s opinion on the gay marriage issue, Obama’s planned endorsement should be a little disconcerting to all. Everything he does is political and, unfortunately, everything he does is labeled great and historic by blind, adoring followers. It is not a stretch of the imagination to consider his gay marriage endorsement to be a paid endorsement.

From The Telegraph

Here’s the problem with the press coverage of Barack Obama: the mainstream media is so overwhelmed by his charisma that they often miss the important details…On Monday, the day before the North Carolina vote, the Hollywood Reporter reported that the marriage question was hurting Obama among west coast donors…One in six of Obama’s so-called bundlers – people who raise money in great stacks for the president’s campaign – is gay…So on Monday, Obama was losing dollars on the Hollywood fundraising circuit. On Wednesday, he endorsed gay marriage…On Thursday, he flew to Hollywood for a fundraiser…Within minutes of the ABC interview that broke the endorsement, the Pres Tweeted “Same-sex couples should be able to get married”…Within 90 minutes, Obama’s re-election campaign had pulled in $1 million in donations…That’s what Barack Obama’s endorsement of gay marriage was all about – not history, not equality…

Read it here: Follow the Money

DJH

 

Feel Good History

April 14, 2011

A bill moving through the California Legislature would require social science instructional materials to include the role and contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans, as well as Pacific Islanders and those with disabilities. This would require history books to include achievements by members of those “diverse” groups, most probably at the expense of traditional historical content.

History deals with events and achievements, none of which rely on sexual orientation for significance. Thomas Jefferson’s sexual preferences are historically meaningless in relation to his documented contribution to this country’s history. Perhaps the field of psychology would find it interesting, but it adds nothing to history. Forcing something into history books for the purpose of making a small percentage of the population feel good about themselves is foolish.

Make no mistake, that is the reason it is being proposed. A San Francisco Chronicle article on the proposition cites a young bisexual girl, Irene, in an effort to make that very argument. Irene complains that she was always troubled that her social studies classes “failed to mention people like her” or any gays, lesbians, or transgender people. This is no cause for legislation.

It should be, but wasn’t, noted that heterosexuals, as a group, are not mentioned as contributors, either. The same can be said for paraplegics, agoraphobics, misogynists, lunch ladies, dog lovers, vegetarians, children of divorced parents, Eagles fans, or thousands of other groups, all of which have been discriminated against (and sometimes physically attacked) by some group of people somewhere.

In fact, the inclusion of a small list of “diverse” groups in the proposed legislation is, itself, discriminatory and will, therefore, offend those groups left out. This will certainly bring the lawyers out of the woodwork. Bowing to diversity is fast becoming very divisive.

This progressive foolishness caters to the few at the expense of the common good. Oops, there’s another “diverse” group being discriminated against: Those still believing in the common good.

David J. Hentosh