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

Barack H. Obama vs. Dr. James Dobson

T

he dialogue that has been going on between Obama and James Dobson is VERY important and "We the people" better take note. Mr. Obama does not have his facts straight. Dr. Dobson is not a minister, priest, or theologian nor makes himself out to be. He is a psychologist and founder and chairman of Focus on the Family. Dr. Dobson represents family values, and is a believer in Jesus Christ. He has fought for marriage, the unborn child, children's rights and is concerned about the deterioration of both our moral values and the moral integrity of our country. I have followed Dr. Dobson for over 40 years. I have relied on his knowledge and wisdom to educate myself, improve my marriage and to raise a son.

Mr. Obama does not seem to know his Bible and should not insult the Christian community in pretending to do so. Judge for yourself by reviewing his outrageous comments:

1. Even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools?

First off, Christians do not want nor would they "expel" anyone. We only want to tell people about Christ and who He is. Secondly, there are no "choices of Christianity" as Obama suggests. It is very clear what Christ believed, taught and what He represents today. Christ did not approve or endorse abortion, homosexual lifestyles or any other sin as mentioned in the Bible. Jesus encouraged those who sinned to give up the sin and sin no more. He encouraged the believer or Christian to love one another but not the sin, which includes not to judge but to discern and not to encourage your fellow man to sin. It is a free country to believe as you may. However, it is not true Christianity unless it follows the complete teachings of Christ as documented in the Bible!

Folks beware, Dr. Dobson does not try to make himself out to be someone he is not. He is very clear in what he believes and why. I do not see that level of character in Mr. Obama.

2. Once again, Obama questions what passage of scripture should guide our public policy? Leviticus, which suggest slavery is ok? Deuteronomy, suggest it is okay to stone a child? Or the Sermon on the Mount?

Mr. Obama really doesn't understand his creator, Christ's relationship to God or what the Bible represents. I am not a theologian, but as a Christian I know there are two testaments. The Old Testament represents the history of creation, God's chosen people, the Jews and the covenant between God and Israel. The New Testament gives us the history of our Savior, Christ, our new covenant between God and his people; believers of Jesus Christ.

As far as the Sermon on the Mount, I suggest Obama start here for his reading. This is the greatest sermon Jesus ever preached. We gain the Lord's Prayer and the Beatitudes. The Beatitudes are meant to provide comfort to the believer.

Oh, yes, regarding stoning anyone to death. May I reference John 8:7. Jesus is speaking in respect to the woman caught in adultery. When they persisted in questioning him, He straightened up and said to them, "Let the person among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." Christ was not advocating throwing stones. He wanted to make the point that if anyone was without sin that he should throw the first stone. Christ was the only eligible one to throw a stone because He was the only one without sin. However, out of love and foregiveness, He chose not to throw a stone.

Is Senator Obama the type of man we want for our Commander in Chief? One who twists the facts. One who believes one thing but says something else? I should "pray" not.

Please do not hesitate to pass this along to a friend.