Obama's EEOC Nominee - "Not Tolerate" any "Private Beliefs"...?

I don't know about you, but when it comes to "freedom of speech", I do not think of separating my speech into 'identity liberty' and 'belief liberty'. That's not freedom, that's just more government control. There are already laws on the books to protect the rights of individuals without developing new laws that are basically for the benefit of a few chosen who have an agenda. Not to mention that this sounds like it is right out of "1984" and it smacks of "nazism" to me.

So please get a good look at the picture to your right. This is the new nominee for the Department of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. She has her program which she feels we all need to live by. She seems to believe that "gay rights" need to triumph and this is how she plans to do it. But, at what cost to religious freedom?

Please take the time to read the article below her picture. Your future freedom of speech may depend on it.




****************************************************************************

CNSNews.com
Obama’s EEOC Nominee: Society Should ‘Not Tolerate Private Beliefs’ That ‘Adversely Affect’ Homosexuals
Monday, January 18, 2010
By Matt Cover, Staff Writer

(CNSNews.com) - Chai Feldblum, the Georgetown University law professor nominated by President Obama to serve on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, has written that society should “not tolerate” any “private beliefs,” including religious beliefs, that may negatively affect homosexual “equality.”

Feldblum, whose nomination was advanced in a closed session of the Senate Health Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee on December 12, published an article entitled “Moral Conflict and Liberty: Gay Rights and Religion” in the Brooklyn Law Review in 2006.

“Just as we do not tolerate private racial beliefs that adversely affect African-Americans in the commercial arena, even if such beliefs are based on religious views, we should similarly not tolerate private beliefs about sexual orientation and gender identity that adversely affect LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender] people,” the Georgetown law professor argued.

Feldblum’s admittedly “radical” view is based on what she sees as a “zero-sum game” between religious freedom and the homosexual agenda, where “a gain for one side necessarily entails a corresponding loss for the other side.”

“For those who believe that a homosexual or bisexual orientation is not morally neutral, and that an individual who acts on his or her homosexual orientation is acting in a sinful or harmful manner (to himself or herself and to others), it is problematic when the government passes a law that gives such individuals equal access to all societal institutions,” Feldblum wrote.

“Conversely, for those who believe that any sexual orientation, including a homosexual or bisexual orientation, is morally neutral, and that an individual who acts on his or her homosexual or bisexual orientation acts in an honest and good manner, it is problematic when the government fails to pass laws providing equality to such individuals.”

continue: Not Tolerate Private Beliefs