Category Archives: Gay Fascism

Lexington businesses denounce Red Hen owner Stephanie Wilkinson

On Friday night, June 23, 2018, The Red Hen restaurant in Lexington, VA, became infamous when its co-owner Stephanie Wilkinson — who is also the director of Main Street Lexington, a civic organization that promotes the city’s businesses — booted out White House press secretary Sarah Sanders, who was accompanied by her in-laws.

Wilkinson claims that her restaurant employees objected to Sanders’ presence because of President Trump’s no-transgenders-in-the-US-military policy and his  “immigration policy” determination to actually implement federal laws on illegal border-crossing.

Wilkinson, 55, who has a Ph.D. in European and American Religious History from the University of Virginia and is reputed to be a cousin of snake-tongue Meryl Streep, even followed Sanders’ in-laws to a restaurant across the street, and organized a protest outside the restaurant while the in-laws were dining. The irony is that Sanders’ in-laws are Democrats.

Note: Duncan Richter, 51, is Wilkinson’s domestic partner and a philosophy professor at Virginia Military Institute.

The blow back from Lexington against Wilkinson was swift.

Mere hours after Wilkinson kicked Sanders & Co. out of The Red Hen, Historic Downtown Lexington Virginia (HDLV) posted this on their Facebook page (Note the Facebook page is no longer available to the public, but the posts are preserved on Conservative Tree House, aka The Last Refuge):

Followed by these messages on HDLV’s Facebook page, denouncing Wilkinson’s behavior:

And this formal statement (retweeted here):

We do not condone the actions of Stephanie Wilkinson owner of the Red Hen Restaurant and Director of Main Street Lexington.

She has embarrassed our town and has given Lexington a bad reputation. So many people are upset and the negative impact and nasty backlash towards our little community is downright appalling.

Our town is actually a wonderful place. Please do not condemn us for one persons [sic] action.

According to the Washington Post, “Lexington, population 7,000, had voted overwhelmingly against Trump in a county that voted overwhelmingly for him.” In the 2016 presidential election, Rockbridge County (Lexington is the county seat) voted for Trump 65.57% – 34.44% (Virginia Department of Elections).

On Tuesday, June 26, Stephanie Wilkinson resigned from her role as Executive Director of Main Street Lexington.

Elizabeth Outland Branner, the president of the organization, wrote in an email:

“Considering the events of the past weekend, Stephanie felt it best that for the continued success of Main Street Lexington, she should step aside.”

More on The Red Hen’s dirt, literal and figurative, in a post to come!

big boy

H/t CSM, GiGi and Katherine Park.

~Eowyn

Virginia school board: No such thing as biological male/female genders

Yesterday, DCG published a post on Australia considering a ban on the terms “boy” and “girl” in children’s book.

But it’s not just Australia.

A county school board in the disUnited States of America means to radically overhaul public schools’ sex-education curriculum to say that there is no such thing as birth or biological gender, which means children are not born male or female. Instead, gender is fluid.

The Baphomet is transgender: neither male nor female

Cathy Ruse reports for Family Research Council, May 15, 2018, that public school students in Fairfax County, Virginia, are subjected to 80 hours of “Family Life Education” sex ed — on the kids’ evolving “sexual identity,” the proper handling of contraceptive drugs and devices, and how to give consent for sex.

But Fairfax County’s longtime Democrat-controlled school board is set to take things from bad to worse.

In early May, the school board — whose members include a 9th-grade student in braces — voted enthusiastically for the following changes to the sex-ed curriculum, recommended by a committee of hand-picked sex-ed advisors. Only three board members voted against the changes. The revised curriculum will be thrusted on every student unless their parents specifically say no.

These are the changes:

  1. Teach Fairfax kids they weren’t born male or female. The term “biological sex” will be replaced by the gender-fluid term, “sex assigned at birth.” As one sex-ed advisor explained: “Biological sex is meaningless!”
  2. Teach 7th and 8th grade students to embrace transgender identity, but don’t tell them about the health risks and side-effects of “gender transitioning.”
  3. Teach every high school student about Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis or PrEP — a daily drug regimen for people “at very high risk” of contracting HIV, who are identified by the CDC as men who have sex with men without condoms. But the students will not be told that the FDA has not approved PrEP for children under 18, or that leading AIDs experts warn that PrEP will lead to a public health catastrophe for encouraging risky sex.
  4. Stop telling students about abstinence — that it is the only 100% effective method to prevent sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). At the school board meeting, the sex-ed advisors mocked abstinence education.
  5. Teach students how to use every available contraceptive drug, device and cream, without telling them about health risks or side effects.
  6. Strip parents of their right to opt their kids out of an 8th grade lesson on dating and family.
  7. Strip the word “clergy” from the list of trusted adults whom students might consult about their sexual identity concerns.

The full report on the proposed revisions to the sex-ed curriculum is available on Board Docs.

Fairfax County School Board members are elected for 4-year terms; one member represents each of the County’s nine magisterial districts, and three members serve at large. A student representative, selected for a one-year term by the Student Advisory Council, sits with the Board at all public meetings and participates in discussions, but does not vote. School Board members are paid a salary of $32,000 per year. The Chairman is paid an additional $2,000 per year.

Fairfax County School Board will vote on the changes at a school board meeting on June 14. The board is soliciting comments from the public about the proposed changes. The deadline for comments is June 8.

To comment on the proposed changes, email FLEcomments@fcps.edu.

H/t FOTM‘s MomOfIV

See also:

~Eowyn

Supreme Court supports Colorado baker’s First Amendment right to refuse ‘gay’ couple

4½ years ago, in December 2013, Colorado administrative law judge Robert N. Spencer ordered Jack Phillips of a bakery in suburban Denver to bake a wedding cake for two homosexuals or face fines, even though doing so violates Phillips’ Christian religious beliefs.

The homosexual couple had sued Phillips.

Phillips said he’d rather shut down his business and go to jail than compromise his beliefs.

Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop, Colorado

This morning, the Supreme Court ruled 7:2 in Phillips’ favor.

Reuters reports that the Supreme Court ruled that, in its handling of the claims brought against Jack Phillips, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission had demonstrated a hostility to religion and violated the baker’s religious rights under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

According to the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, in refusing to bake a wedding cake for “gay” couple David Mullins and Charlie Craig, Phillips violated the Colorado anti-discrimination law barring businesses from refusing service based on race, sex, marital status or sexual orientation.

Homosexual couple David Mullins and Charlie Craig

Phillips was threatened and harassed by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, and was ordered to:

  1. “Cease and desist” from discriminating against same-sex couples by refusing to sell them wedding cakes or any product Phillips would sell to heterosexual couples.
  2. Undertake “comprehensive staff training on the Public Accommodations section of the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act”.
  3. “Change any and all company policies to comply with. this Order”.
  4. Prepare quarterly compliance reports for a period of two years documenting the number of patrons denied service and why, along with a statement describing the remedial actions taken.

Had Phillips not appealed his case to the Supreme Court, he would be minimally fined and probably prosecuted and jailed for refusing to comply with the misnamed Colorado Civil Rights Commission’s order.

Of the Court’s four liberals, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissented, while Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan joined the five conservative justices in the ruling.

According to the ruling:

[The Colorado Civil Rights] Commission’s treatment of Phillips’ case, which showed elements of a clear and impermissible hostility toward the sincere religious beliefs motivating his objection. As the record shows, some of the commissioners at the Commission’s formal, public hearings endorsed the view that religious beliefs cannot legitimately be carried into the public sphere or commercial domain, disparaged Phillips’ faith as despicable and characterized it as merely rhetorical, and compared his invocation of his sincerely held religious beliefs to defenses of slavery and the Holocaust. No commissioners objected to the comments. Nor were they mentioned in the later state-court ruling or disavowed in the briefs filed here. The comments thus cast doubt on the fairness and impartiality of the Commission’s adjudication of Phillips’ case.

In the words of Justice Anthony Kennedy, who wrote the majority opinion:

“The commission’s hostility was inconsistent with the First Amendment’s guarantee that our laws be applied in a manner that is neutral toward religion.”

The Supreme Court, however, stopped short of issuing a definitive ruling on the circumstances under which people can seek exemptions from anti-discrimination laws based on their religious views. Justice Kennedy wrote:

“The outcome of cases like this in other circumstances must await further elaboration in the courts, all in the context of recognizing that these disputes must be resolved with tolerance, without undue disrespect to sincere religious beliefs, and without subjecting gay persons to indignities when they seek goods and services in an open market.”

President Donald Trump’s administration had intervened in the case in support of Jack Phillips.

H/t FOTM‘s MomOfIV

UPDATE:

From the AP:

People streamed into Phillips’ cake shop after the ruling came down, embracing him as his phone rang repeatedly with congratulations from people who view him as their champion.

Supporter Ann Sewell, who brought a clutch of congratulatory balloons to the bakery, compared Phillips’ bravery to people opposed to the Vietnam War.

“If you could be a conscientious objector and not fight in a war then you should be able to hold to your convictions in something as simple as this when it is not hurting anyone,” Sewell said. “It might offend someone, but that’s life.”

In November, Phillips headlined a rally at Colorado Christian University, not far from his bakery. Somewhat nervous, he voice rattling as he thanked those attending. At the conclusion of his five-minute address, the crowd swarmed around Phillips, touched him and prayed.

~Eowyn

Mike Huckabee forced to resign from Country Music Association foundation because of NRA membership

I had thought country music and country music fans to be conservative.

Not!

On March 1, 2018, less than a day after the announcement of his election to the Country Music Association (CMA) Foundation board of directors, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee was forced to resign because of criticisms from CMA members and country music fans about his politics and National Rifle Association (NRA) membership.

The CMA Foundation is the charitable arm of the Country Music Association, devoted to growing and supporting music education programs across the country. Its board consists of 12 members.

Country music executive and CMA board member Joe Galante explained in a statement that Huckabee was elected to the position because the Foundation could benefit from the knowledge gained during Huckabee’s extensive political career: “Gov. Huckabee led an impressive administration while serving the state of Arkansas and his policy experience with education reform is something we are fortunate to be able to learn from.”

But Huckabee’s election to the board immediately sparked virulent criticisms from CMA members, as well as hundreds of comments from outraged fans on social media, many of which are threatening to boycott the CMA, CMA Music Festival and country music as a whole.

Jason Owen

Calling Huckabee’s appointment a “grossly offensive decision,” Jason Owen, the homosexual co-president of Monument Records and owner at Sandbox Entertainment, threatened in an email to CMA’s CEO Sarah Trahern and CMA Foundation executive Tiffany Kerns that neither Owen’s companies nor anyone they represent would continue to support the CMA Foundation.

Owen and his husband Sam are fathers to a young son and are expecting twins. Owen said that Huckabee’s stance on the LGBTQ community “made it clear my family is not welcome in his America. The CMA has opened their arms to him, making him feel welcome and relevant. Huckabee speaks of the sort of things that would suggest my family is morally beneath his and uses language that has a profoundly negative impact upon young people all across this country. Not to mention how harmful and damaging his deep involvement with the NRA is. What a shameful choice.”

CMA member Whitney Pastorek, who is the manager of Sugarland, wrote this email to CMA executives:

“What a terrible disappointment to see (the CMA Foundation’s) mission clouded by the decision to align with someone who so frequently engages in the language of racism, sexism, and bigotry. While Gov. Huckabee’s tenure in Arkansas may have resulted in valuable education reform over a decade ago, I find his choice to spend the past ten years profiting off messages of exclusion and hatred (not to mention the gun lobby) to be disqualifying.”

Huckabee wrote in his letter of resignation:

“I genuinely regret that some in the industry were so outraged by my appointment that they bullied the CMA and the Foundation with economic threats and vowed to withhold support for the programs for students if I remained. I’m somewhat flattered to be of such consequence when all I thought I was doing was voluntarily serving on a non-profit board without pay in order to (continue) my decades of advocacy for the arts and especially music.”

Source: USAToday

See also “Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that Second Amendment applies to individuals, not militias, and may include military weapons”.

~Eowyn

Hell just froze over: CA judge rules in favor of Christian baker who refused to bake wedding cake for lesbians

In October 2017, two lesbians, Eileen and Mireya Rodriquez-Del Rio, sought to buy a wedding cake from Tastries Bakery in Bakersfield, CA, for their upcoming same-sex marriage.

Mireya and Eileen Rodriquez-Del Rio

The owner of the bakery, Cathy Miller, said she must decline “because she does not condone same-sex marriage,” but that she would send their order to another bakery, Gimme Some Sugar.

The lesbians filed a complaint before California’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH), which sided with the lesbian couple and ordered Miller to provide the cake on the grounds that:

  • Miller had violated California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act, which bars discrimination in public accommodations, in this case the baking and selling of a cake.
  • Miller is not protected by the First Amendment, which protects only “those occasions where government requires a speaker to disseminate another’s message”.

Source: Washington Post

On February 5, 2018, California Superior Court Judge David R. Lampe ruled in favor of Cathy Miller. Judge Lampe wrote in his decision:

“The State of California brings this action under the Unruh Civil Rights Act, Civil Code section 51, against defendants Cathy’s Creations, Inc. and Cathy Miller. Miller refuses to design and create wedding cakes to be used in the celebration of same sex marriages. She
believes that such marriages violate her deeply held religious convictions. The State seeks to enjoin this conduct as unlawfully discriminatory. The State brings the action upon the administrative complaint of a same-sex married couple, complainants Rodriquez-Del Rios.
The State cannot succeed on the facts presented as a matter of law. The right to freedom of speech under the First Amendment outweighs the State’s interest in ensuring a freely accessible marketplace.
The right of freedom of thought guaranteed by the First Amendment includes the right to speak, and the right to refrain from speaking. Sometimes the most  profound protest is silence. […]
The State’s purpose to ensure an accessible public marketplace free from discrimination is a laudable and necessary public goal. […] No artist, having placed their work for public sale, may refuse to sell for an unlawful discriminatory purpose. No baker may place their wares in a public display case, open their shop, and then refuse to sell because of race, religion, gender, or gender identification.

The difference here is that the cake in question is not yet baked. The State is not petitioning the court to order defendants to sell a cake. The State asks this court to compel Miller to use her talents to design and create a cake she has not yet conceived with the knowledge that her work will be displayed in celebration of a marital union her religion forbids. For this court to force such compliance would do violence to the essentials of Free Speech guaranteed under the First Amendment. […]

Such an order would be the stuff of tyranny. Both sides advocate with strong and heartfelt beliefs, and this court has a duty to ensure that all are given the freedom to speak them. The government must remain neutral in the marketplace of ideas.1

No matter how the court should rule, one side or the other may be visited with some degree of hurt, insult, and indignity. The court finds that any harm here is equal to either complainants or defendant Miller, one way or the other. If anything, the harm to Miller is the greater harm, because it carries significant economic consequences. When one feels injured, insulted, or angered by the words or expressive conduct of others, the harm is many times self—inflicted. The most effective Free Speech in the family of our nation is when we speak and listen with respect. In any case, the court cannot guarantee that no one will be harmed when the law is enforced. Quite the contrary, when the law is enforced, someone necessarily loses. Nevertheless, the court’s duty is to the law. Whenever anyone exercises the right of Free Speech, someone else may be angered or hurt. This is the nature of a free society under our Constitution.

Judge David Lampe’s ruling will be a precedent for the U.S. Supreme Court to consider in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, wherein Colorado baker Jack C. Phillips argues that the First Amendment’s free speech and free exercise of religion clauses give him the right to refuse wedding services to a same-sex couple, despite public accommodations laws that require businesses that are open to the public to treat all potential customers equally.

Phillips has the support of the Trump administration, marking the first time the U.S. government has argued for an exemption to an anti-discrimination law.

David R. Lampe, who has a J.D. from Santa Clara University School of Law, was appointed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) in June 2007 to the Superior Court of Kern County, California.

God bless Judge Lampe!

~Eowyn

Liberal tolerance: Billie Jean King calls for Aussie’s name to be removed from arena because of stance on homosexual marriage

billie jean king

Billie Jean King (l) and Margaret Court (r)

Per proggie rules, no dissenting opinions allowed.

From Daily Mail: Margaret Court’s husband has hit back at Billie Jean King and others who called for her name to be taken off the Australian Open arena.

The former tennis champion was embroiled in controversy last year when she spoke out against marriage equality.

Her comments provoked calls to change the name of the Margaret Court Arena, in Melbourne, with Billie Jean King and Martina Navratilova the latest tennis players to speak out in favour of the change.

‘I probably don’t think it’s appropriate to have her name. If I were playing today, I would not play on it,’ Ms King said. ‘I was fine until lately, she says so many derogatory things about my community.’

In an interview with Vision Christian Radio last year, Court said transgender tendencies were ‘all the devil’.

‘What confusion to a child. I get confused talking about it. You can think, ”I’m a boy”, and it affects your emotions and feelings and everything else. That’s all the devil,’ she said.

Speaking out on Saturday, Court’s husband Barrymore Court said ‘there should be no thought of changing the name’. He claimed his wife ‘never made the statement that transgender children being of the devil [sic]’.  

‘I suggest Billie Jean first check her facts before making allegations against my wife,’ he told the Sydney Morning Herald. ‘We have reputable sources review all her press releases and interviews and cannot trace these remarks back to Margaret.’

Mr. Court went on to say his wife always shared an amiable relationship with King both on and off the court. ‘Margaret always admired Billie Jean as her number one opponent and often praised her ability,’ he said.

King, who is openly gay, previously said she hoped Margaret Court would attend the Australian Open so the pair could discuss the issue face-to-face. ‘I was looking forward to seeing her, we usually sit together… we usually have lunch,’ King said.

Court however says she will not attend event, telling organisers she would instead go ‘crabbing’ with her family.

King said she was one of the main ‘proponents’ of the court being named in honour of Court in the first place.   ‘When Rocket, Rod Laver, got given the arena, I said ‘what are you going to do for Margaret?’ the 74-year-old said.

But I think it’s really important, if you’re going to have your name on anything, that you’re hospitable, inclusive, you’re opening arms to everyone that comes to a public facility. ‘If you were talking about indigenous people, Jews or any other people, I can’t imagine the public would want to have her name on something.’

She said she wouldn’t be openly encouraging others to boycott playing on the court, but asks they consider it. Ms. Navratilova recently told the New York Times she wouldn’t play on the court, but doubted current players would make the decision.

In May, Court remarked ‘tennis is full of lesbians’, claimed transgender children were the result of parents who ‘don’t care’ and related non-heterosexual thinking as the work of Nazis, communists and the Devil.

‘God’s got so much in there about the mind how it affects us, affects our emotions, our feelings, you can think ‘oh I’m a boy’ and it’ll affect your emotions and feelings, and everything else and so that’s all the Devil,’ she told the Daily Telegraph.

‘That’s what Hitler did, that’s what Communism did, got the mind of the children. And it’s a whole plot in our nation and in the nations of the world to get the minds of the children.’

DCG

Queer Theology Coming To A College Near You

Breitbart: Swarthmore College Introduces ‘Queering the Bible’ Course

by TOM CICCOTTA – 22 Dec 2017

Next fall, the prestigious Swarthmore College will introduce a course called “Queering the Bible.”

…In another course offered in the department called “Queering God: Feminist and Queer Theology” the attempt is made to argue that God is a female.

Read article: http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/12/22/swarthmore-college-introduces-queering-the-bible-course/


Personal thoughts on this:

I shared the above article because I find it so offensive that some academics are getting away with promoting perversion and declaring it to be righteous. So very sad. Pray that God unmasks this stuff.