A Matter of Perspective: The Fallout From Obergefell

People cannot hide who they really are, especially with the anonymity inherent in the Internet.

And we see the true character of the homosexual agenda coming out into our homes and public places.

The Rainbow People--meaning those who identify with or support the homosexual and same-sex marriage movement--present as a gang of hateful hoodlums bent upon bullying anyone who disagrees with them, using messages of hate, threats and a sincere desire to see the worst happen to anyone who doesn't consent to be bullied. They project their own hateful motives upon those whose only sin is to disagree with them without vitriol or imposing their will. The mere refusal to play the game is enough to set the Rainbow People off. These horrible people who disagree with the Rainbow People are often Christians, whose only desire is to live their lives according to their faith, while leaving the Rainbow People to live their lives.

Granted, certain Christians do not condone the sins of the Rainbow People, which is likely the impetus for the Rainbow People's own vicious attacks upon Christians who act according to their faith. The Rainbow People must have universal acceptance of their sins in order to feel like they aren't sinning. Their own guilty conscience condemns them when anyone refuses to accept their sins. It's like a gang, who must initiate members into the gang by compelling them to commit crimes and murders so that the initiates are bound to the gang members by their crimes and will not betray their gang members without risking their own freedom. Christians are a threat, because they will not accept the sins that the Rainbow People approve of.

Some few Rainbow People have actually tried to understand what compels a Christian to take this stand, to refuse to bake a cake or take photographs for a same-sex wedding, to refuse to marry same-sex couples. For those who genuinely try to understand, here is the reason:

To a Christian, this passage requires that they neither bless nor condone another who remains in sin, nor partake of that sin. Baking a cake, taking a wedding photo, issuing a marriage license or marrying a same-sex couple is to partake of that sin. It is not bigotry, it is keeping themselves pure according to their faith.

But there are some who claim to be Christians who do accept the sin of homosexual behavior, who agree that this is about love, rather than a perversion of God's love for carnal purposes. These may be Political Christians, who take a position based on political expediency and political correctness over the harder stand based on Scriptural teaching, because it is safer than taking a stand based on Scripture. There are Social Christians, whose participation is based on the their social standing, rather than Christian Fellowship. There are Commercial Christians, who use the label of Christian to promote themselves or their business, exploiting the name for profit. Whatever their motive for taking the name of Christian, they do not practice what Scripture teaches, and that is their choice, but to judge faithful Christians based on what Casual Christians believe or do is not valid.

Nobody gets to tell anyone how to practice their faith, whether it is the unfaithful telling the faithful how to express their faith and visa versa. . .that is between the individual and God. It is wrong to tell someone else how to practice their faith.

It is important to note--excuse me for injecting facts that undermine the rhetoric--Kim Davis simply does not want her name on same-sex marriage licenses. As county clerk, she requested the state legislature to change the law requiring her name be on the license. They did not. It was a simple accommodation, yet a judge is forcing her to violate her conscience by putting her name on an official document that violates her deeply held religious beliefs. She did not do this to prevent anyone's marriage, or even condemn same-sex marriage, she only stood against endorsing this sin with her name. This was not an act of hate, it was an act to keep herself pure, as Scripture requires. She chose God's law over man. This is the definition of acting according to one's conscience.

But the question remains, is same-sex marriage the law? Many state laws defined marriage as being between one man and one woman. That's law. Five unelected justices of the Supreme Court found the Constitution said that same-sex couples have the right to marry, without that concept being expressly stated in the Constitution. Is that law? If it is, then we have lost our right to representative government, which is a concept that should be a concern to everyone, including the Rainbow people.

However, in contrast, it is expressly stated in the Bill of Rights, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;". This is the law, the written law.

Yet, we see that the highly subjective and fabricated edict of five justices is overriding the letter of the Constitution. Consequently, Christians are being punished for exercising their religious beliefs.

Even if I concede for the sake of argument, that same-sex marriage is the law, then the law is in conflict with Scripture. For a faithful Christian it's a no-brainer; this conflict is resolved in favor of God, even knowing the consequences that might ensue.

If the law can be used to persecute the practice of Christian faith, it can happen to the Rainbow People. Exhibiting stunning shortsightedness -- instead of being concerned for the future of the rule of law, they rejoice that officially recognized oppression is implemented on their behalf, and that the rule of law can be so easily subverted for their own personal gain.

The law is not supposed to serve an agenda, it is supposed to serve the greater good, a concept that escapes the Rainbow People. For them, circumventing the rule of law serves their malignant narcissistic desires at the expense of the greater good. The rule of law is dead, killed by the Rule of Five Justices and a deception by the homosexual agenda.

Christians are being targeted for exercising their faith, and the Rainbow People rejoice and spread deception in support of their victory over the rule of law.

Casual Christians, non-Christians and Rainbow People don't have any right to tell faithful Christians how to believe or practice their faith, yet they presume to. They try to demand that faithful Christians restrict their faith the the four walls of the Church or the home, failing to understand that their faith is encompassed by their hearts and minds. Their faith and the practice of their faith is part of their business, their daily activities, their job as employees. It cannot be confined to a physical place. And the Constitution protects that practice, as do the state Constitutions. I show the three state constitutions that are the subject of this discussion:

I cite as an example, this decision by the Ohio Supreme Court Board of Professional Conduct:

Last month, the Ohio Supreme Court's Board of Professional Conduct said judges can't refuse to marry same-sex couples on personal, moral or religious grounds.

Judges who stop performing all marriages to avoid marrying same-sex couples may be interpreted as biased and could be disqualified from any case where sexual orientation is an issue, the Ohio board ruled.

It would appear that judges in Ohio are now subject to a religious test to determine their qualification for office, in violation of the Ohio Constitution. In violation of the law. Great for the Rainbow People, not good for the people of Ohio who cannot rely on the law meaning what it says it means.

In Oregon, a judge is being investigated for refusing to perform same-sex marriages because it violates his religious beliefs.

The Rainbow People rejoice:

Yet, even the Obergefell court stated that certain rights are above the reach of government:

This expressly applies to freedom of religion. So why is an Oregon judge being subjected to a professional fitness investigation? Why is Kim Davis in jail? Why can Ohio judges be held in askance for refusing to perform same-sex wedding ceremonies? It can only be because the law doesn't mean what it says it means, at least if you are a Christian. It can only be because the law means what it doesn't say it means but means it anyway and will be enforced against a Christian.

The Rainbow People say Christians should not hold public office, have a job, or run a business if they have a faith-based objection to providing services that endorse same-sex marriages. Seriously? Ban Christians from the same rights afforded to non-Christians; the right to work, to hold public office, to have a job or own a business? The outrageousness of this position defies belief in a country that was built upon principles of religious freedom and equal opportunity. What's next, relocation of Christians to designated ghettos?

According to the Rainbow People, Christians should not be allowed to work or be elected officials which means Christians cannot be represented in our representative government. And the Christian-haters don't see anything wrong with a segment of our population being told not to work at the job of their choice, not to sell or run a business, and not to run for office because they refuse to burn a pinch of incense to Caesar and declare him to be god. This is appalling intolerance being practiced in the name of tolerance. Any critical-thinking, tolerant person is highly offended by this hypocritical posture.

A Christian refusing to participate in same-sex marriage is not bigotry, it is a devoutly held religious belief based on Scripture. Just because Christian-haters don't have faith or believe in God means nobody else should? Seriously? In America?

History teaches that Christian persecution and martyrdom serves to overthrow the machine that persecutes them. The Supreme Court opened the door to Christian persecution in the name of same-sex marriage, and are responsible for the outcomes.

This is shameful in a country whose founding arose out of those escaping religious persecution. Now we have a Christian in jail for exercising her religious beliefs, because the state refused the reasonable accommodation of removing her name from the marriage licenses. Businesses are fined out of existence for refusing to bake same-sex wedding cakes. Will judges be removed from the bench for refusing to partake of another's sin even when another judge would be willing to perform the ceremony? Are we really prepared to imprison people for their faith? How long before we feed the faithful to the lions?

This is a witch-hunt, with Rainbow People driving the hysteria of hate and evil. . .wishing the worst on those who simply cannot compromise their faith to save their job. Poking fun and making nasty comments. A gang reinforced by other gang members, thinking they are clever, when they are just mean-spirited, ugly and intolerant, projecting their own hatefulness on their enemy. I leave you with their own words proving their ill-will and malevolence toward anyone who defies their demands for acceptance, punctuating their guilt and shame by simply refusing to participate in or approve of their sin.

You just can't make people agree with you against their will, no matter what you do. Just like many will not agree with this post. So what? I don't need anyone else's agreement. That's what separates Christians from the Rainbow People.

Alleged Letter Penned By Kim Davis Contains Hilariously Inaccurate Bible Quote
By Liz Lee on September 5, 2015

Please let this be real. Please don’t let this be an awesome attempt at trolling the notorious Kim Davis. A letter has started making the rounds on the Internet that is said to be written by Davis from her jail cell. Sounds a little too much like a reference to Martin Luther King Jr.’s letters doesn’t it?. . .OMG? Seriously? Please let this be real. Please. It can be my birthday present and Christmas present.