Issue is about government handing out special rights to preferential groups
December 19, 2013
Daniel D’Addario, writing for uber-liberal Salon, is correct. The Duck Dynasty imbroglio is not about the First Amendment. A&E has the right to suspend whatever actor or television show it deems appropriate for its business. “Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one,” said A. J. Liebling, highlighting what should be common sense.
D’Addario takes Sarah Palin and other conservatives to task for citing the First Amendment in the debate over Phil Robertson’s comments about his sexual preference and religion published in Esquire magazine. Palin was certainly off base, but notice D’Addario does not touch on the real issue here — the left activist and corporate media sanctified homosexual agenda currently masquerading as the next human rights campaign.
For many Democrats and libs, rejection of homosexuality along religious lines, as expressed by Robertson, is a hate crime little different than the hate crime of Nazis shuffling Jews off to death camps. The absurdity of this is imperceptible to the average liberal. In order to make up for this supposed prejudice, liberals insist gays must be granted special rights by the government. Special government granted rights for one preferential group, of course, necessitates a diminishment of rights of another group.
After special rights are granted to a preferential group by government, the real First Amendment issue arises. People who express disapproval and on occasion contempt for homosexuality are suddenly transformed into hate criminals who don’t deserve the right to exercise the First Amendment.
Since the late 1960s, gay activists have demanded society not only accept their lifestyle unquestioningly, but provide affirmation. “We are no longer seeking just a right to privacy and a protection from wrong. We also have a right — as heterosexual Americans already have — to see government and society affirm our lives,” said homosexual spokesperson Jeff Levi in 1987 before the National Press Club in Washington.
Acceptance of the gay lifestyle necessitates indoctrination. Soon after gay marriage was codified in Massachusetts, the government sanctified validity of homosexuality was merged into grade school curriculum. First grade teachers were instructed that they must “be aware of varied family structures, including… gay or lesbian parents,” and “children must be taught to acknowledge the positive aspects of each type of household.” Books for children with names like “Heather Has Two Mommies” and “Gloria Goes to Gay Pride” included the gay ethic in public education regardless of often vociferous opposition by parents.
The gay agenda, largely designed and promoted by the global elite and the establishment intelligentsia, has worked on multiple levels to erode Christian-based morals, rollback legal statutes with religious foundation, and modify laws to legalize homosexual marriage, force business to hire openly gay people, and in general make negative opinions by individuals regarding homosexuality illegal.
Salon does not tread this territory because it enthusiastically supports the gay agenda, as does the rest of the so-called left. Instead it concentrates on erroneous comments made by Sarah Palin and others who are confused about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
For the left, special government-granted rights for homosexuals at the expense of heterosexuals is the next wave in the socialist transformation. It is an ideal tool wielded by progressive activists as they bludgeon the opposition in authoritarian fashion and continue an effort to turn political ideology they disagree with into criminal behavior.