You Will Be Assimilated - Part 1
If you are a Star Trek fan you will
recognize the title of this week's article. In the follow up to the original
Star Trek series with William Shatner, Star Trek TNG, portrayed the
ongoing endeavor to "go where no man has gone before." One of the
arch-enemies in that follow up series was the Borg, whose practice it was to
assimilate its captors into a single unit of beings, controlled by one mind,
and robbing its victims of their individuality, as well as their freedoms. When
communicating with the enemy the Borg would show no mercy, no compassions; only
its intentions to absorb others into their collective half-human, half machine
society. "You will be assimilated" served as both their goal, and
their battle cry.
In this week's issue of The Weekly Standard, Jonathan Last wrote one of the feature articles, titled, "You Will Be Assimilated." It is, in my estimation, one of best exposes of the dishonest, twisted, and perverted attempt by the homosexual community to, as the tittle suggests, assimilate everyone into their way of thinking. You may be familiar with Brendan Eich; but if not, let me share with you some information about this man who incurred the wrath of the homosexual community for no other reason than the fact that he decided to support Proposition 8 with a $1,000 contribution. Proposition 8 was California's attempt to limit marriage to one man and one woman. The Proposition passed by an overwhelming majority of the voters; in fact more voted in support of the Proposition than those who voted for Barack Obama in the 2012 election. Brendan Eich was the cofounder and CEO of Mozilla. When it was discovered that he had donated to a Proposition that would have opposed same sex marriages, he was dismissed from his company. He had never treated his gay workers badly. The only reason why he was dismissed was because of his opposition to same sex marriages. The Weekly Standard provided its readers with a series of Twitter exchanges between Mr. Eich and one of his co-workers, who by the way, was among one of the first to demand Eich's resignation. That Twitter exchange revealed a much deeper agenda that just "same sex marriage" privileges. Commenting on the brief exchange between the two men, Mr. Last noted:
It's a small thing, to be sure. But telling. Because it shows that the same-sex marriage movement is interested in a great deal more that just the freedom to form marital unions. It is also interested, quite keenly, in punishing dissenters. But the ambitions of the movement go further than that. It's about revisiting legal notions of freedom of speech and association, constitutional protections for religious freedom, and cultural norms concerning the family. And most Americans are only just realizing that these are the social compacts that have been pried open for negotiation (Jonathan Last, page 20).
In order to promote their agenda, the homosexual community has taken carefully calculated steps to hide their true goal from eyes and ears of the public. Take, as an example, the bold faced lie that a large percentage of society are homosexual. For decades, gay-right activists have pushed the line that at least 10% of the American population are homosexual. If they were to succeed in promoting this lie then the American public must be brought to believe that 1 in 10 people are gay. In spite of evidence to the contrary, they have been remarkably successful in propagating that lie. The public has fallen for that lie in astonishing numbers. In 2012 Gallup did a poll asking people what percentage of the country was gay. The response was incredible: "Women and young adults were the most gullible, saying, on average, that they thought 30 percent of the population was gay. The average American thought that 24 percent of the population-one quarter-was gay" (Jonathan Last, page 20). Evidence does not support anything near to that percentage. In 2014 a study from the Centers for Disease Control conducted a study from a relatively large sample of adults. Out of 34,557 adults it was found that an incredible 96.6 identified themselves as heterosexual, 1.1 percent refused to answer. That means that only 1.6 to 1.7 percent identified themselves as gay. The American public has been duped! But then again, the lie had to be told, and told often enough, to convince the public that there was a large number of Americans who, as gays, were being discriminated against.
Now let me return to the purpose for this first part of my two (maybe three) part series. The agenda of the homosexual movement is to assimilate all of society into their way of thinking. To do this, they must stop the opposition; dissension cannot be tolerated. There are dozens of cases where homosexual activists have used more than simple persuasive arguments to advance their goals; they are using the law (though in a dishonest way) and outright violence to promote their perverted agenda. Jim Mettenbrink provided me with an email touching on some of the following, so I pursued the web connections to verify there were correct. Consider the following:
Betty and her husband, Richard, are the owners of Görtz Haus Gallery in Grimes, Iowa. In 2002, they purchased the 77-year-old stone church and transformed it into a bistro, flower shop, art gallery and wedding venue. On August 3, 2013, a gay couple from Des Moines asked to rent Görtz Haus for their wedding. Because of their Mennonite faith, the Odgaards told the couple they could not host their wedding. Within 24 hours, the couple filed a discrimination complaint through the Iowa Civil Rights Commission. "We knew that the business was going to be in trouble almost immediately," Richard, 69, said. "We had to get rid of the wedding business to avoid another complaint and possibly a higher penalty." The Odgaards never admitted to any discrimination, but agreed to a $5,000 settlement. They closed their business as a result.
An article in USA Today: A Michigan business owner who sparked controversy by posting opinions on Facebook about refusing to serve certain groups, including gay customers, has been the target of vandalism. Last week, Dieseltec owner Brian Klawiter made headlines when he posted that he would refuse to provide service to openly gay customers. Mr. Klawiter wrote on his Twitter page: "Well folks, as we predicted, it did't take long for the ugly face of the homosexual movement to present itself. What started out with mere death threats has escalated to physical violence."
Two magistrates in North Carolina were ordered to perform same-sex marriages, or resign. The North Carolina office for the court system had said, "Magistrates should begin immediately conducting of all marriage of couples a marriage license issued by the register of deeds. A failure to do so would be a violation of the U.S. Constitution." Penalties? Possible suspension, removal from office and criminal counts.
The list goes on, an on, and on. More than two dozen cases where men and women, who refuse to cater to the demands of the homosexual movement, are being sued, fined, and driven out of business.
In next week's article I want to focus on the dishonest tactics being used by the gay activists. Meanwhile let all of us earnestly pray that God will overturn the intentions of the wicked, and that our Supreme Court justices will come down on the side of what is morally right, and Biblically authorized.
In this week's issue of The Weekly Standard, Jonathan Last wrote one of the feature articles, titled, "You Will Be Assimilated." It is, in my estimation, one of best exposes of the dishonest, twisted, and perverted attempt by the homosexual community to, as the tittle suggests, assimilate everyone into their way of thinking. You may be familiar with Brendan Eich; but if not, let me share with you some information about this man who incurred the wrath of the homosexual community for no other reason than the fact that he decided to support Proposition 8 with a $1,000 contribution. Proposition 8 was California's attempt to limit marriage to one man and one woman. The Proposition passed by an overwhelming majority of the voters; in fact more voted in support of the Proposition than those who voted for Barack Obama in the 2012 election. Brendan Eich was the cofounder and CEO of Mozilla. When it was discovered that he had donated to a Proposition that would have opposed same sex marriages, he was dismissed from his company. He had never treated his gay workers badly. The only reason why he was dismissed was because of his opposition to same sex marriages. The Weekly Standard provided its readers with a series of Twitter exchanges between Mr. Eich and one of his co-workers, who by the way, was among one of the first to demand Eich's resignation. That Twitter exchange revealed a much deeper agenda that just "same sex marriage" privileges. Commenting on the brief exchange between the two men, Mr. Last noted:
It's a small thing, to be sure. But telling. Because it shows that the same-sex marriage movement is interested in a great deal more that just the freedom to form marital unions. It is also interested, quite keenly, in punishing dissenters. But the ambitions of the movement go further than that. It's about revisiting legal notions of freedom of speech and association, constitutional protections for religious freedom, and cultural norms concerning the family. And most Americans are only just realizing that these are the social compacts that have been pried open for negotiation (Jonathan Last, page 20).
In order to promote their agenda, the homosexual community has taken carefully calculated steps to hide their true goal from eyes and ears of the public. Take, as an example, the bold faced lie that a large percentage of society are homosexual. For decades, gay-right activists have pushed the line that at least 10% of the American population are homosexual. If they were to succeed in promoting this lie then the American public must be brought to believe that 1 in 10 people are gay. In spite of evidence to the contrary, they have been remarkably successful in propagating that lie. The public has fallen for that lie in astonishing numbers. In 2012 Gallup did a poll asking people what percentage of the country was gay. The response was incredible: "Women and young adults were the most gullible, saying, on average, that they thought 30 percent of the population was gay. The average American thought that 24 percent of the population-one quarter-was gay" (Jonathan Last, page 20). Evidence does not support anything near to that percentage. In 2014 a study from the Centers for Disease Control conducted a study from a relatively large sample of adults. Out of 34,557 adults it was found that an incredible 96.6 identified themselves as heterosexual, 1.1 percent refused to answer. That means that only 1.6 to 1.7 percent identified themselves as gay. The American public has been duped! But then again, the lie had to be told, and told often enough, to convince the public that there was a large number of Americans who, as gays, were being discriminated against.
Now let me return to the purpose for this first part of my two (maybe three) part series. The agenda of the homosexual movement is to assimilate all of society into their way of thinking. To do this, they must stop the opposition; dissension cannot be tolerated. There are dozens of cases where homosexual activists have used more than simple persuasive arguments to advance their goals; they are using the law (though in a dishonest way) and outright violence to promote their perverted agenda. Jim Mettenbrink provided me with an email touching on some of the following, so I pursued the web connections to verify there were correct. Consider the following:
Betty and her husband, Richard, are the owners of Görtz Haus Gallery in Grimes, Iowa. In 2002, they purchased the 77-year-old stone church and transformed it into a bistro, flower shop, art gallery and wedding venue. On August 3, 2013, a gay couple from Des Moines asked to rent Görtz Haus for their wedding. Because of their Mennonite faith, the Odgaards told the couple they could not host their wedding. Within 24 hours, the couple filed a discrimination complaint through the Iowa Civil Rights Commission. "We knew that the business was going to be in trouble almost immediately," Richard, 69, said. "We had to get rid of the wedding business to avoid another complaint and possibly a higher penalty." The Odgaards never admitted to any discrimination, but agreed to a $5,000 settlement. They closed their business as a result.
An article in USA Today: A Michigan business owner who sparked controversy by posting opinions on Facebook about refusing to serve certain groups, including gay customers, has been the target of vandalism. Last week, Dieseltec owner Brian Klawiter made headlines when he posted that he would refuse to provide service to openly gay customers. Mr. Klawiter wrote on his Twitter page: "Well folks, as we predicted, it did't take long for the ugly face of the homosexual movement to present itself. What started out with mere death threats has escalated to physical violence."
Two magistrates in North Carolina were ordered to perform same-sex marriages, or resign. The North Carolina office for the court system had said, "Magistrates should begin immediately conducting of all marriage of couples a marriage license issued by the register of deeds. A failure to do so would be a violation of the U.S. Constitution." Penalties? Possible suspension, removal from office and criminal counts.
The list goes on, an on, and on. More than two dozen cases where men and women, who refuse to cater to the demands of the homosexual movement, are being sued, fined, and driven out of business.
In next week's article I want to focus on the dishonest tactics being used by the gay activists. Meanwhile let all of us earnestly pray that God will overturn the intentions of the wicked, and that our Supreme Court justices will come down on the side of what is morally right, and Biblically authorized.
--by Tom
Wacaster
No comments:
Post a Comment