ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • Church & State Relations

My Rabid Support For The Indiana Religious Freedom Law....

Updated on April 3, 2015

My Rabid Support For The Indiana Religious Freedom Law....

Let us get to the heart of the matter without delay. Same-Sex-union/Marriage is and always will be an abomination, as it is recorded in the Bible! No support from the current secular messiah, President Obama nor the media nor the vain-glorious celebrities of Hollywood nor the world in general nor I can make homosexual/lesbian behavior moral... as the Lord Jesus defines morality. So it is that the Indiana legislators sought to carve out a 'safe harbor,' as we lawyers call it, to protect Traditional Christians, who do not want to engage in any personal actions that could be construed by Christ Jesus as supporting homosexuality. Case in point, if I am a baker in Indiana, I may not want to cater a wedding for homosexuals; on the other hand, the homosexual advocates are saying that letting Traditional Christian bakers in Indiana be permitted not to cater to gay nuptials is Discriminatory and has the potential to be a 'Slippery Slope.' Moreover, the gay advocates support their 'Slippery Slope' argument by equating being gay to that of being Black, knowing that our history shows that some so called Christians, especially from the South, during the Civil Rights era of the Sixties, used the Bible to discriminate against Blacks and went so far as to enact laws to foster said discrimination.

The gay advocates and charlatans like many of the members of our NAACP, along with Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, have all sold their souls for filthy mammon by accepting and parroting this disgusting comparison... whereby men placing their penises in other men anuses where the stench of the human waste gather to that of being Black. Those of you who are Black and especially those of you who are Traditional Christians think of that image to critically look at this bogus, specious comparison. I know that most of these men in the NAACP do not believe that men practicing homosexuality is the same as being Black - but the gays have so much money that they have much material influence even over many our Jesus' houses of worship. It is why now and going forward that many Christian preachers are not going to address the fact that homosexuality is utterly immoral, and, that, it is also does not help matters that there are conspicuous homosexuals leading many of our 'praise and worship' services on any given Sunday.

Back to the main topic at issue, where, apparently, now, Traditional Christians in Indiana, or moreover, elsewhere, cannot exercise their Constitutional First Amendment's right, or moreover, their Jesus-given religious right to practice the tenets of their Faith. How is it that many of our citizens in America have views and practices that we dare not violate, but for Christians, exercising those same rights, borne out adherence to their Holy Scriptures, concerning same sex marriage or the like, are not afforded that same Constitutional, religious latitude? Perhaps, we should force the Jews, Arabs, or Rastafarians to eat swine - after all, most of us do consume areas of the pig... as part of our staple diet. And for those homosexual advocates who are saying that Christians in the past have used the Bible to discriminate against Blacks and that we Blacks should be simpatico with the homosexual cause, I say that those so called Christians were perverting the Words of Christ Jesus: Show me in the Bible where it is written that it is a sin, much less an abomination, to be Black? Mark my word that the next battle to be fought will be the ever growing powerful, demonic gay lobby trying to tell preachers that they cannot preach against homosexuality from the pulpits.

I must address the hypocrisy of many in the secular movement like the openly gay CEO of Apple, Mr. Tim Cook. Mr. Cook was very forceful and passionate in condemning Indiana for its religious freedom law and implied that many should not do business there. Now how many Middle Eastern countries and populated Muslim enclaves where Mr. cook would be summarily kill for practicing homosexuality, yet he rabidly courts those same countries/people in selling all of the Apple wares (I-Phones, etc). Does anyone thinks that Mr. Cook has been or will be in the future so vociferous in condemning Muslims around the world about their laws against homosexuality?

Why Is It That Homosexuals Think Only They Can Affect Businesses Economically? A couple years ago, homosexuals berated the owner of Chic-fil-A because he did not support gay marriage. Homosexuals and their advocates thought that they could negatively affect the bottom line of the Chic-fil-A chain, but alas, the chain of stores economically are still performing well, and the owner, apparently, did not recant his belief that marriage should be between a man and a woman. On a personal note, last Christmas, I bought an Apple laptop computer for one of my siblings, notwithstanding the fact that I knew that the Apple CEO, Mr. Cook, was openly gay. I conveyed this to show that it is not only the homosexuals that could economically boycott businesses. Do I tell my children that they cannot see the Lion King on Broadway because most of the soundtrack was written by the openly gay, Elton John? Do I refuse to watch The Lord of the Rings movies because one of the major stars, Sir Ian Mckellen (Gandalf) is openly gay? In a supporting vein, my beloved mother, who also believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman, watches the show Perry Mason, even though she knows that the lead in that iconic series, Raymond Burr, was gay. I can go on and on with examples where Christians who do not support same-sex-marriage, yet they commercially support establishments where gays are part and parcel of the services provided.

There are those, sadly even some preachers, telling and perverting the Word of God, saying that Jesus never addressed homosexuality. In Matthew 19:4, Mark 10:6; and Genesis 5:2, Jesus said, in the beginning, He (God) made them male and female. For those who do not know the Bible before Jesus came in the flesh, over 2000 years ago, He was with the Father in Heaven when He warned the patriarch Abraham of the pending fiery destruction of those practicing homosexuality and inhospitality in Sodom and Gomorrah. In the Bible, Cush is the Biblical name given to Ethiopia and Blacks are considered the descendants of Noah's son, Ham - have you read anywhere in the Holy Bible where God destroyed Ethiopia because the people there were Black or tell me where in the New Testament, where Jesus came in the flesh, that He spoke out about the curse of being born Black? Jesus once met a woman at Jacob's well and told that woman to go and sin no more because she was having sex with men who were not her husband - someone then explain to me that if Christ Jesus thought that a woman having sex with a married man is a sinful trespass then how could sex between men (Homosexuals/Lesbians) be morally ok? I say to my Traditional Christian brothers and sisters in Indiana and elsewhere to stand firm... knowing that these happenings were predicted by the very Christ in the Gospel of Matthew - Maranatha!


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No comments yet.