Trump Can Destroy Hillary Tonight By Exposing Her Radical Beliefs on Religious Freedom

Donald Trump (photo credit: Disney | ABC Television Group via Flickr, CC BY-ND 2.0)

Donald Trump has an incredible opportunity tonight. With momentum on his side, and with critical swing states shifting in his direction, he has the ability to convince millions of undecided voters to support him. The best way he can do that is by exposing Hillary Clinton’s extreme positions.

Voters are generally aware of her corruption and her involvement in dozens of scandals. They understand intuitively that she is not trustworthy. But do they know about her support for radical leftist policies that would make Che Guevara blush?

In a speech in April 2015, Clinton told a feminist audience, “Deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs, and structural biases have to be changed” in order to allow for more abortion.

This anti-American idea that “religious beliefs have to be changed” is not new. Like most progressives, Hillary Clinton finds religion to be an annoying pest that gets in the way of promoting progressive orthodoxy. When the Clinton campaign says “Love Trumps Hate” on their bumper stickers, what they really mean is that modern progressive beliefs about gay marriage and gender ideology should trump anything written in a book written thousands of years ago.

That’s their attitude. Faith should submit to political ideology. It’s completely antithetical to what people with sincerely held religious beliefs actually believe — that political principles are born out of faith.

Understandably, given this attitude, Clinton sees the First Amendment — and really, religion itself — as a roadblock to progressive utopia. Continue Reading

Kaine Attacks Trump for “Eroding Religious Liberty”

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) (photo credit: US Department of Education via Flickr, CC BY 2.0)

Last week, Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Kaine faced a great deal of scrutiny over his apparent hypocrisy on the issues of abortion and religious liberty. Despite the bad press, however, Kaine is continuing to speak out of both sides of his mouth on social issues.

At a campaign stop on Monday in his home state of Virginia, Kaine attacked Trump for “eroding religious liberty.”

“Donald Trump says we got to treat people differently, keep people out of the country, impose tests on folks if they’re Muslim,” he said. “That would be a major erosion of a fundamental value in this nation, a value that frankly, we are like the lighthouse that is holding that out as a beacon to people around the world.”

“So many people live in countries around the world where they are punished because of how they worship, they are oppressed because they’re a religious minority or maybe because they choose not to believe,” Kaine continued. “And they look at us as the place, we might be able to be like them one day where we can live in the same neighborhood, go to the same schools, you know go to work together and have different faiths but get along just fine.”

These comments display a pleasant sentiment. However, despite Kaine’s message of tolerance and common citizenship, he has a truly abysmal record on religious liberty issues himself.

For instance, Senator Kaine has co-sponsored the Equality Act, a bill which would treat traditional Muslim, Orthodox Jewish, and Christian teaching on marriage and sexuality as akin to racism and would force religious florists, bakers, photographers and others to violate their consciences or lose their livelihoods if they object to participating in a same-sex wedding ceremony. Continue Reading

Democrats Embrace Totalitarian Legislation in New Platform

Photo credit: Disney | ABC Television Group via Flickr (CC BY-ND 2.0)

Earlier this week at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, delegates approved one of the most radical social agendas ever embraced by an American political party.

Though many media outlets have been focusing on the DNC’s open-doors bathroom policy or the record number of LGBT delegates on the convention floor, the real radicalism on LGBT issues can be found in that platform’s ardent support for the Equality Act.

Introduced in 2015, and co-sponsored by presumptive Democratic VP nominee Tim Kaine, the Equality Act would expand the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to enact a ban on discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

“We will also fight for comprehensive federal nondiscrimination protections for all LGBT Americans,” the DNC’s platform outlines. “We support a progressive vision of religious freedom that respects pluralism and rejects the misuse of religion to discriminate.”

Claiming that adherence to traditional sexual morality is a “misuse” of religion reveals the deeper issues with the Equality Act and the Democrats’ LGBT agenda more broadly. For the left, religious liberty is only tolerable when it provides absolutely no impediments to the pursuit of a radical agenda.

Ryan Anderson, an expert on issues of marriage and religious liberty, argued that, despite the nice-sounding name and rhetorical defenses of the bill, the Equality Act would be terrible public policy for just that reason.

“They threaten small-business owners with liability for alleged ‘discrimination’ based not on objective traits, but on subjective and unverifiable identities,” Anderson wrote for The Daily Signal Continue Reading

Does the LA Times Understand What Religious Freedom Means?

Photo credit: American Life League via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0)

How did a bill defending religious liberty, which passed the Senate 97-3 and was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, become so controversial? This is the question posed in an op-ed published last Friday by the Los Angeles Times Editorial Board, examining recent liberal opposition to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993. The Times contends that the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision, as well as recent attempts to protect religious bakeries, for example, have made it clear that Congress must restrict religious freedom protections lest they “be used to justify discrimination.”

They admit the need for some religious accommodation: Muslim prisoners can grow beards, and Native Americans and Sikhs may keep ceremonial items related to their faith. But they draw the line at acting on any religious belief. Or, rather, refusing to act contrary to religious belief. Protecting outward signs of faith is fine, it seems, so long as the protection does not extend to acting on the convictions they signify.

They even claim to basically agree with RFRA, which established that the government may not substantially burden anyone’s free exercise of religion unless the burden furthers a compelling government interest and is the least restrictive means of doing so. But it is hard to imagine a more restrictive burden on religious belief than coercing adherents of the world’s major religions to act against thousands of years of religious teaching.

The Times proposes as remedies the Do No Harm Act and the Equality Act of 2015. Continue Reading

LGBT Activist Group Announces Radical Agenda to Eliminate Religious Freedom Protections

Photo credit: Ted Mielczarek via Flickr (CC BY 2.0)

Following the Supreme Court’s decision legalizing same-sex marriage, LGBT activists have decided that they’re not finished. The largest organization working to advance the LGBT agenda recently announced its newest set of goals for the upcoming months—goals which, according to the Witherspoon Institute, include “the most invasive threat to religious liberty ever proposed.”

At the 2015 Chicago gala last weekend, Human Rights Campaign President Chad Griffin unveiled three new areas of focus: passing the Equality Act, stopping the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA), and further “activating the LGBT vote.”

The Equality Act seeks to amend the 1964 Civil Rights Act to add “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to federal non-discrimination laws.  If it passes, its “sweeping effects on religious liberty, free speech, and freedom of conscience would be historic.” The act would essentially elevate sexual orientation and gender identity to the level of race, therefore equating any dissenters with racists and bigots. It creates a “new form of discrimination” by socially isolating those with a traditional belief in marriage and sexuality.

The Equality Act would also have a devastating effect on protections for individuals and businesses who find it a violation of conscience to provide services for wedding ceremonies. It would prohibit the denial of any good or service to persons on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity but makes no distinction between baking a cake for a birthday party and baking a cake for a wedding ceremony.

Moreover, the Equality Act would cut the legs out from under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, barring any individuals, businesses, educational institutions, or religious institutions from appealing to RFRA. Continue Reading

Did Jeb Bush Just Side Against Rights of Christian Florists, Bakers?

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (photo credit: Gage Skidmore)

UPDATE: The Bush campaign has responded.  I stand corrected.

Astonishingly, no-one appears to have noticed this bit in a Politico story on Ted Olson, former conservative, endorsing the so-called Equality Act:

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush weighed in on the issue of anti-discrimination bans during a visit last week to a tech start-up in California. When asked by a gay employee whether or not he favors anti-discrimination protections for LGBT citizens, Bush responded that a florist “should be obligated to sell [a gay couple] flowers; doing otherwise would be discriminatory.” He added, though, that a florist objecting to same-sex marriage should not be obligated to participate in the wedding ceremony itself.

Barronelle Stutzman, Melissa Klein, Kelvin Cochran and all the others now being prosecuted as criminals for refusing to cater a gay wedding: Jeb Bush has apparently sided with your persecutors.

Read more here.

UPDATE: Some viewers read this story differently from the way I did and suggest that Bush was saying florists should have to serve gay customers flowers but not provide flowers for same-sex weddings.  We are reaching out to the Bush campaign for clarification.

Maggie Gallagher is a senior fellow at American Principles in Action. Continue Reading