Oh no, I agree with Rush Limbaugh on something: "Gaystopo": The Gospel According to John « RightDirection

I'm sure the school will be happy to dope up your boys on Ritalin so they behave as prim and proper ladies. The 'War on Boys'....
I would be remiss if I did not mention the case of Vicki Knox. Ms. Knox is a NJ high school teacher who made posts to her own Facebook page from her own home computer. Knox, 49, used her Facebook page to criticize a display in her Union Township school marking Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender History Month. She called homosexuality a "perverted spirit" and a "sin" that "breeds like cancer." Homosexual activists, the LGBT crowd which Rush Limbaugh refers to as the Gaystopo, are calling on Ms. Knox to be fired, citing to the new HIB law.

The Gospel According to John « RightDirection.

Oh my, I actually found something where I agree with Rush Limbaugh.

However, he gives away the perfectly good word "gay" that means happy. Whereas, I call them homosexual fascists. Homosexual Gestapo works, but it isn't as clever (clever, Rush Limbaugh? -- yikes!).

One can only wonder if the Teachers' Unions will eventually try to use HIB against Governor Christie, whom I'm sure has insulted many a teacher in his public remarks. It is not implausible to imagine the Teachers' Unions claiming the Governor has created a "hostile educational environment", which Democrat appointees to the judicial bench would be all too happy to entertain.

Hey, guess what? Governor Christie actually sided with the anti-Viki Knox crowd. What goes around does come around though.

Anyway, the legal reasoning of the article is fairly sound. As I was reading the law, I thought the same thoughts that the article went on to address with the exception of the few things below.

What about the person who is insulted simply by the existence of homosexuality? What about people who feel/know that homosexuality is harmful and that exposing their children to the concept that it is not harmful is dangerous and disruptive to their family and children's proper upbringing and education, etc.?

Why do the homosexuals' "feelings" count for more than the non-homosexuals' feelings? Are homosexuals really that weak? They seem to be pretty pushy for being people who need to be protected from others who disagree with homosex and say so openly, as I do for instance.

I say homosex is always a choice. I also say that it is always harmful. Most importantly though, I say that the truth should be taught to all the children (who are hearing otherwise now) that penises do not belong in anuses, ever!

Anyone who wants to put his penis in your anus is mentally ill. It screams out "mental illness," misguided, etc. Everyone who has been tempted to or who has engaged in anal sex has erred, has been duped, must repent, and must stand against the homosexual act for the sake of truth and health. Yes, that includes heterosexuals.

(If you wonder why I care or why it's my business, I care because people are damaged by it in many ways on many levels. It's my business for all the reasons it was Jesus's business.)

There was nothing wrong with society being nearly unanimously against homosexuality. It's too bad it wasn't completely unanimously against homosexuality. That would have been a good thing!

It has been a bad thing that the homosexuals have weaseled there way into everything on the sly, twisting minds to perversion, lying that anal sex is not a bad thing or mostly completely ignoring it and hoping everyone else will too, lying that they will stop with the call for "tolerance" to condoning to promoting to celebrating to firing, torturing, and executing (yes, if left unchecked, it will come to that: capital punishment for anti-homosexuality and anti-fascism in that case: capital punishment for those against the downward slide toward greater and greater moral decadence, and on and on). Don't tell me it's not true. I've been threatened firsthand.

This law also completely fails in that it claims that religious free exercise ends where the private school grounds meet the non-private school grounds. In other words, the law fails the First Amendment test by saying that religious free speech is confined to private religious school grounds. That's totally unconstitutional. You can't tell a child that he or she can't say publicly that based upon religion he or she doesn't agree with homosexuality. You can't tell a child that he or she can't say it in public school during free time such, as recess and lunch and between classes and the like.

People fought wars over this right. You better think before you keep pushing. You may be pushed back much harder than you ever dreamed. I'm not calling for it, but I know the wrath is out there waiting.

Some people will believe it's righteous indignation when they fight physically against homosexuality taking over, which more and more people are coming to realize is exactly the homosexual plan and has been all along. Don't count on the children not waking up either. When they get older and look back and realize they were led down the homosexual garden path, there may be a major backlash.

See also: Protected speech v. illegal religious discrimination: Viki Knox: homosexuality "perverted" "sin" "breeds like cancer"

  • Subscribe

  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.