At the Salt Lake Police Department, the only thing officers are handcuffing is freedom. Like most Americans, Eric Moutsos never dreamed that his faith would cost him his job. But that’s exactly what happened last summer after the long-time policeman asked for a different post at the city’s gay pride event.
He was asked, along with other members of the team, to lead the motorcycle brigade at the very front of the parade. Moutsos said he “felt uncomfortable doing what he considered celebratory circles with other motorcycles leading the parade because of his religious views” and asked to be placed somewhere else at the event. “It is unquestionably my duty as a police officer to protect everyone’s right to hold a parade or other event, but is it also my duty to celebrate everyone’s parade?” For that particular assignment, he explained, “It looks like we and I are in support of this parade. I said I would feel the same way if this was an abortion parade. I would feel the same way if it was a marijuana parade.”
Not once did he refuse to work the parade — yet in the middle of working out a compromise with his boss, he was suspended. The move absolutely blind-sided him. Shocked, the dad of four went home and
told his family what happened. Almost immediately, the story broke that an unidentified member of the Salt Lake Police Department had been put on a leave of absence for “discrimination.”
In typical P.C. fashion, Chief Chris Burbank spun the controversy as a story of prejudice and bias. “It has nothing to do with religious freedom — that has to do with the hatred of those individuals and what the parade stands for, which is about unity and coming together,” he told local reporters. Obviously, the chief is too busy policing people’s views to protect them. After six months of absolute turmoil, Moutsos decided to come forward and reveal his identity. As a Mormon — whose church recently threw its support behind the very ordinances that make this kind of persecution possible — Eric wants to turn his oppression into an opportunity.
In an interview with Deseret News, Moutsos said his story should be a warning to every American who thinks same-sex “marriage” and homosexuality won’t affect them. “We can 100 percent disagree and still 100 percent love. I hate that we’re labeled in this way that is so divisive.” Although Moutsos found a job with another police agency, he thinks his most important work is protecting religious liberty. He hasn’t been asked to testify to lawmakers, but he’d like to.
Like Atlanta Fire Chief Kelvin Cochran, Eric was told to either check his beliefs at the door or get out of public service. If the Mormon Church thinks that throwing its weight behind sexual orientation-gender identity measures like Houston’s will shield people like him, they’re sorely mistaken. How do you protect anyone’s freedom of belief if you give the government another weapon to punish it? All this does is force Christians underground — or worse, into a religious ghetto cut off from the rest of society.
First of all, that’s not what we’re called to do in the church. And secondly, it’s not what our freedoms allow. It’s tough to get the American people to agree on anything — but they agree on that. In FRC’s survey released this week by WPA Opinion, 81% of the country (which as unanimous as it gets in the polling community) agreed that the government should leave people alone to live and work according to their beliefs. If anyone’s ready to lead that parade, we are!
Those who hold to the historical and traditional view of marriage as between one man and one woman have long warned that if homosexual marriage is permitted, it will only be the beginning of the end of the very definition of marriage. Now, it seems like those predictions are coming true.
A new arrangement masquerading as marriage has recently emerged. Christian News Network reports:
Photos of three Thai men who recently ‘married’ each other have gone viral, garnering societal support for the concept of same-sex “throuples” worldwide, but also generating remarks from Christians about the confirmation of the slippery slope that has long been predicted.
Yes, that’s right, now three people can apparently claim to be in a three person marriage. But, this is not the first time this has happened.
Christian news Network goes on:
As previously reported, last May, three women in Massachusetts exchanged vows as they claimed to be the world’s first lesbian “throuple.”
A “slippery slope”? This is a gaping chasm for society. First, it was two people of the same sex. Now it’s three people of the same sex. Why only three? Why not seven, fourteen, twenty-four? After all, as the same sex advocates have chanted for years – love is love. As Christian News Network explains:
“The events in Thailand simply confirm what we’ve been saying all this time: If marriage is no longer the union of one man and one woman, then it can be anything: Two men, two women, three men, three women, or an almost infinite number of other possibilities,” Dr. Michael Brown wrote for Charisma News.
He noted that the situation demonstrates how mankind has made up its own rules along the way in an attempt to legitimize and justify what a particular person wants. Since homosexuals have stated that marriage should be defined as the union of two people who have feelings for each other, regardless of gender, where does the rule about two people come from?
If there is no standard for marriage, there can be no marriage. If there is no understanding of the spiritual, historical, and familial understanding of marriage, there can be no marriage; only groups of people choosing to cohabitate.
The devastating effect on children in these unusual arrangements is just now beginning to be seen. The societal effect will be exponential. No society has ever long survived without strong nuclear families. Ours will be no exception.
When Hillary Clinton wrote the book – It Takes A Village – perhaps this is what she had in mind! The old Hollywood movie – Yours, Mine, and Ours – also can now be seen in a new light.
But, in all seriousness, Dr. Michael Brown concludes:
“Those who have taken down the fence of marriage as God intended it have opened up a Pandora’s Box of possibilities,” he said, “none of them good.”
He is right. We are still just at the beginning of how bizarre it will become if we continue down this path of societal self-annihilation!
Whenever and wherever normal people resist the mainstreaming of homosexuality, the LGBT movement and its allies attribute that resistance to “a climate of hate and fear” orchestrated by evil “homophobes” who exploit the prejudices of the ignorant by telling lies about “gay and lesbian people” who “just want equal rights.” They predict a wave of violence against “sexual minorities” and then set out to create their own evidence in support of it, all for the purpose of manipulating public opinion and public officials into the role of “protectors of the innocent.”
Here in America the strategy was first initiated on a small scale with human rights commissions at the local level in the 1970s, then at the state level and finally nationally in conjunction with the current massive leftist campaign to create a constitutional right to “gay marriage” by judicial fiat. Homosexualist Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy famously struck down the federal Defense of Marriage Act in United States v. Windsor on the grounds that opposition to homosexual “marriage” was motivated by “animus” (hatred). SCOTUS will likely use the same false logic when it rules for “gay marriage” this summer (absent a miraculous intervention by God).
This dangerous LGBT strategy has now gone global and the target is the Russian Federation.
To those who don’t fully recognize the Machiavellian character of the LGBT movement, or the extent to which the American media (even to an increasing extent FOX News) has become a sort-of “Gay Pravda,” what I’m about to state may seem crazy, but bear with me.
Not that it doesn’t also serve other globalist interests, but I have come to believe that protecting and advancing the LGBT agenda is the primary reason that Barack Obama orchestrated the coup to start a civil war in Ukraine. (See this excellent article on the theme that Obama‘s foreign policy is ideologically driven, though it doesn‘t specifically address the homosexual agenda.)
We were reminded this week that the LGBT agenda is a “core value” of the Obama administration when he appointed the first ever U.S. global envoy for “gay rights.” He had previously tasked the State Department to make the LGBT agenda a top priority of US policy abroad.
To the Obama administration this is, literally, again literally, what is meant by “American values,” though most people don’t grasp this and still translate the phrase to something benign and wholesome such as “Mom and Apple Pie” or the like. To BO, core values are not freedom of speech — that’s clearly trumped by “gay rights” in his world. Nor economic freedom — you can’t run a business that refuses to bake cakes, take photos, or provide flowers for “gay weddings.” Core American values to Obama are publicly celebrated sodomy and doctor-assisted transsexual self-mutilation.
In this commitment to “gay rights” BO is joined by and represents an ideological cartel of global elitists who have cooperated together to force it upon the world. More on that in a later essay.
The Russian anti-propaganda law, passed June 11, 2013, was the first truly effective international counter-measure since the “gay” agenda went global around the turn of the millennium. Typically, the “gays” characterized the law as hateful and an incitement to violence, but in doing so they revealed that propagandizing children is part of their agenda, since the law simply classifies “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relationships” as material that cannot be distributed among minors and commands the government to protect children from it.
Just after the passage of this law Barack Obama did an about-face on the “reset” policy (in which Russia had been recognized as an equal partner in the world community) and instead began reviving cold-war rhetoric.
During the Sochi Olympics of February 2014, BO tried to steer Russia back into line through the usual media-driven pressure tactics (which don’t work on Russians who endured worse under the Soviets).
When that didn’t work BO started the civil war in Ukraine to force Russia into its current no-win scenario there. US diplomats were caught red-handed in the early stages of this regime change.
Nuland said “F*** the EU,” because it resisted the plan for forced Ukraine regime change as inimical to its business interests but (in my view) the US didn‘t care because its interests were ideological and punitive.
BO knew, of course, that Ukraine to the Russians was the strategic equivalent of Cuba, or even Hawaii, to the US and they could never simply acquiesce to the transfer of their most critical warm-water port in Crimea and oil interests in the east to a hostile US-controlled regime.
The Russians were deliberately pushed into a situation where they could be portrayed as bullies — rather like the way a couple of “gay” activists set up the conservative State of Texas as aggressors. They (allegedly) orchestrated their own arrest for sodomy so they could portray themselves as victims to a Supreme Court majority (led by Kennedy again) looking for a chance to strike down the anti-sodomy laws. Thus we got the 2003 Lawrence v. Texas ruling, which was used as the “moral impetus” for the first “gay marriage” law in Massachusetts in 2004.
Texas wasn’t breaking down anyone’s door to enforce its sodomy law (any more than the Russians were aggressing against Ukrainians before the US coup) but was pushed into doing so by LGBT agents provocateur. No one produces better agents provocateur than the LGBT movement, which has presumably been well represented in the US intelligence agencies since Bill Clinton lifted the ban on top-secret security clearance for “gays” in 1992.
After the Ukraine coup d’etat, BO and his media stooges then joined with anti-family GOP snake-in-the-grass John McCain and his fellow neo-cons (and their media stooges) in a relentless campaign of war propaganda on the theme that Russia is intent on reconstructing the evil Soviet empire. In just over a year Obama and McCain et al, have turned Russia into a pariah state in the view of the US and EU sheeple, based on nothing but disingenuous portrayals of the Ukraine crisis and unsupported fear-mongering that Russia intends military adventures against the Baltic states.
Incidentally, John McCain’s former chief strategist, Steve Schmidt, was hired in 2013 by the ACLU “to build GOP support in the states for legislation to make gay marriage legal.”
And while we’re on the subject of Republicans, don’t believe for a second that the GOP establishment is not kowtowing to “gay rights” behind the scenes just as much as the Dems do it openly. Even under ostensibly pro-family George W. Bush the State Department was pushing the homosexual agenda around the world. I personally confronted the diplomatic staff at the US embassy in Riga, Latvia in 2007 for helping to organize a “Gay Pride” parade in defiance of an overwhelming pro-family majority in that conservative nation.
Apparently deciding it’s now time to stop hiding their homophilia, Bush dynasty heir apparent Jeb just hired a top LGBT activist as his communications director
And here’s another bombshell that missed the conservative media. The Human Rights Campaign effort to characterize American pro-family activism in foreign countries as fostering “hate and fear” (an effort which labels me Public Enemy #1) was funded by GOP mega-donors Paul Singer and Daniel Loeb.
Back to Russia. Recently I was interviewed by the BBC for a documentary the producers said was about “the global culture war.” However, the interview focused heavily on my reaction to the reports of — Surprise! — an alleged increase in “anti-gay” violence in countries that have passed laws against homosexuality” particularly Russia and Uganda These reports (which they never showed actually showed me) were allegedly prepared by Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, the United Nations, and Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG), bastions of impartiality all. (Btw, SMUG is suing me for “Crimes Against Humanity” for preaching against homosexuality in their country).
This brings us back full circle to the theme of this essay. I told the BBC interviewer that I did not view any of these sources as trustworthy on the issue of homosexuality and cited the Matthew Shepard and David Kato murders as evidence. Indeed, I had already accused Human Rights Watch of indulging in pro-“gay” propaganda in their first video purporting to show Russian anti-gay violence (released to coincide with the Olympics), where I exposed the LGBT movement’s fraud in their characterizations of the Shepard and Kato incidents,
So here’s the moment of truth for pro-family analysts and advocates. Do you really grasp the extent to which LGBT leaders and activists will go to serve their own interests? You’ve seen what they do at the street level, against Christian businesses, etc. What would that deviltry look like on an international level, if, say, the President of the United States were a “gay” activist?
In August of 2013 I sent a open letter to President Putin, thanking him for signing the anti-propaganda law. In it I warned him “not to assume that you have fully solved the problem by the enactment of this law. The battle to protect your society from homosexualization has only just begun, and you may be surprised to discover in the coming months and years just how aggressively many world leaders will work to try to intimidate and coerce you to capitulate to homosexualist demands.”
Regardless of where one stands on Ukraine or Vladimir Putin, just for a moment consider where the pro-family movement would be if it hadn’t been for the Ukraine coup. Russia would still be (relatively speaking) a respected member of the international community offering an alternative, genuinely pro-family model for social policy. There would likely be at least a half-dozen nations which would have adopted the anti-propaganda law for themselves (with many more considering it) and there would be a healthy international debate raging on pro-family vs LGBT visions for the future. I believe the tide would probably have begun to turn in our favor, at least on the global scene, if not yet in the US or EU.
Is it really so far-fetched to believe that morally wicked, Imperialistic, Alinsky-ite Obama (credibly alleged to be a homosexual himself) started the Ukrainian civil war to punish Russia for opposing the “core value” of America, the priority of his State Department? Or (more importantly to the “gays”) to prevent the Russians from leading a pro-family counter-revolution in the world?
Are you as a pro-family conservative really going to accept the word of Barack Obama, John McCain and the mainstream media that Russia is the bad guy in this story? If you do, you really don’t know your enemy — and I’m not talking about Putin.
Next time you hear the implication that Russia has created “a climate of hate and fear” in Ukraine, Russia or anywhere else, just remember whose go-to strategy this is for smearing its opponents and how deeply they are entrenched in the media, the White House and now the GOP establishment as well.
Related in the Article