There is no longer any doubt, we are living in the midst of a war. It’s not a typical war, where soldiers battle it out, seeking dominance and victory for their country. It’s a cultural war; a multi-front conflict between the traditional values this country was founded upon and progressive-liberalism. First shot fired? An old fashioned bible ban.
In this war, the field of battle is the public arena, the media and the halls of Congress. This war is actually nothing new; it is something that has been going on for almost a century. But it has changed significantly in recent times. Whereas before it was a war between conservatism and liberalism, it is now a war between conservatism and progressivism. While those on the left would have us think that liberalism and progressivism are the same, they distinctly are not. We can see that in looking no farther than the Left’s treatment of the First Amendment. Classic Liberalism stands firmly for freedom of expression, while progressivism denies it.
Under intolerant, progressive rule, all are required to act, speak and think in obedience to the Left’s definition of political correctness. In this war of ideas, the progressive strongholds of the coasts are continually pushing the envelope to see what they can get away with. Much of that consists of forcing their bigoted agenda on the American people. Since they can’t usually get their way through the legislative process, they use the media and the courts to mold society to fit their desires. But every once in a while progressives win in the legislative process as well. This is seen nowhere more clearly than in California, the testing ground for things progressive and intolerant.
With their stranglehold on the state legislature and the courts, California has been paving the way for every new idea that appears on the left’s agenda. One essential element in the left’s agenda is supporting groups that they consider marginalized. It doesn’t matter if they really are or not, just that the perception of marginalization exists. So a group that is actually in the majority can be considered marginalized if they are seen as being outside the norm. But most of these groups are actually in the minority; in fact, far in the minority. Such is the case of homosexuals and others in the LGBT community. If you listen to the left talk of it, this group consists of the vast majority of the country, when in reality it includes less than two percent of the total population. It just happens to be a very vocal two percent, who are very good at throwing money at promoting their cause. Gender orientation is a hot topic today only because the left has decided to make it one.
Homosexuality is nothing new. It has existed at least as far back as Sodom and Gomorrah. What is new is the LGBT having so much political clout, that they can force society to adapt to their desires. Isn’t that what happened when the Supreme Court declared same-sex marriage constitutional? California Bill AB2943 This leads us to California AB2943, a bill, now signed into law, which purports to be related to unlawful business practices. Many states have laws like this, which are there to protect consumers. But hidden within the pages of California’s version, in paragraph 28, is a provision which bans: “advertising, offering to engage in, or engaging in sexual orientation change efforts with an individual.” If that isn’t clear (it’s not), the bill further goes on to explain, “any practices that seek to change an individual’s sexual orientation. This includes efforts to change behaviors or gender expressions, to eliminate or sexual or romantic attractions or feelings towards individuals of the same sex.”
This may seem benign, but it’s absolutely not. It essentially makes it illegal to say or do anything which can be construed as an attempt to change a person’s sexual orientation. I assume, since this is a law that has something to do with commerce, they’d have to prove that money is involved in some way. Even so, churches and ministries do receive offerings. Not to mention, the sales of bibles means money transactions. Those on the left are trying to say that Christian organizations which are speaking out against this law are merely crying “wolf,” following their typical tactics of ridiculing anyone who disagrees with their groupthink. But the truth is, laws like this are extremely dangerous, mostly because of how loosely they are defined.
This one leaves a lot of room for regulatory and legislative redefinition of the law. Not to mention the state officials that will have to make their own calls as well the snitch culture that will soon develop. That’s at least part of the problem. Even laws which are written with the best of intentions can be manipulated and twisted into unrecognizable forms. If there is a loophole, someone will find it and that someone will most likely be on the political left and try using that loophole in the law to move things more closely to the progressive-liberal ideal. Such possibility makes this law extremely dangerous. Now that it has been signed into law, it’s only a matter of time until someone uses it against the Christian community.
Whether the first attack will be against a church, Christian counselor, parachurch organization or Christian bookstore is yet to be seen. But you can be sure that it will happen. Most likely, there will be several well-planned and coordinated attacks, created with the intent of building case law to restrict Christians and others who are not in favor of the LGBT agenda. It is doubtful that they will go after the Bible right away. The Bible is still a well-respected document, with a long history of use. Even many secular scholars recognize its value from a historic and teaching point of view. Instead, they will seek to attack at some point which seems weak, such as a Christian couple seeking counseling from their pastor for their gender-confused child.
Isn’t that Unconstitutional? This provision of AB2943 is undoubtedly going to end up going before the Supreme Court before all is said and done. On the surface, the law is unconstitutional, treading on the First Amendment and our freedom of religion. Throughout American history, freedom of religion has included applying that freedom in all areas of life. But there has been a move among Democrats to limit that freedom for some time. One Democrat lawmaker recently stated that Christians can’t be lawmakers. He wasn’t alone in this; many Democrats agree with that sentiment, trying to keep Christian beliefs out of politics altogether.
Progressivism is a jealous god, explaining why the Democrat Party officially removed any mention of God from their platform and other official statements. To them, the government is god and the provider of all our needs. Any different religious beliefs that people have should be kept out of public sight. Former President Obama made this clear on several occasions, publically redefining freedom of religion to be freedom of religious worship, but only in private in private. That may sound innocent, but it wasn’t. It was a clear statement of policy. He was attempting to change the meaning of our First Amendment religious rights to fit the progressive-liberal agenda by forcing Christians to keep their faith out of the public arena.
Before any legal case to validate or invalidate California’s attack on the Bible and the Christian faith reach the Supreme Court, it will have to pass through a lengthy process. This includes going before liberal state and federal justices in California, including the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which is the most liberal appellate court in the country. They will most likely support the law, forcing such a case to be brought before the Supreme Court. This is probably the intent of those on the left, who will want to use this law to attack Christianity and further the LGBT agenda. Whatever case they take before the courts will be carefully selected with this in mind, just as the Scopes Trial was.
Knowing they will be facing a tough Supreme Court challenge, they will choose a case which will give them the greatest chance of victory. This victory is essential to achieve their goal of reducing Christian influence and the influence of the Bible in our country. Without a doubt, the left would build upon this success to further marginalize Christian beliefs and remold the country into their image. The other thing we could be sure that would happen is that this law would spread from California to the rest of the country, as fast as Democrat lawmakers could make it happen.
That would, of course, depend on where they had power. If we faced a situation where both houses of Congress and the Presidency were once again controlled by Democrats, they would try to institute it on a national level, if they did not have that opportunity, they would seek to implement it in states where they did have that level of control. Basically, what happens in California doesn’t stay in California. Instead, California is the left’s test lab to determine how fast and how far they can push, to reshape the country. They are evangelicals after all.