I have long been suspicious of conspiracy theories. I have usually been skeptical of alarmist statements, meant to stir up emotional reactions. That is one of the reasons that I have tried to give the benefit of the doubt as to the good intentions of those whom I would view as political opponents. Hence I have for some time held out hope that defenders of same sex marriage would show that they are truly tolerant and publicly state their support for the civil rights of those who cannot, because of deeply and sincerely held religious and moral beliefs, agree with or participate in activities that support their lifestyle. That hope has now been dashed, after viewing a program called Gay USA on the Freespeech Network today.

I watched as James Esseks, head of the ACLU effort to legalize same sex marriage, indicated in an interview that he did not approve of any legal exemption for religious believers in the law as regarding issues of sexual orientation. Essentially, he implied that they have no intention whatever of allowing ANY legal exemptions or exceptions for Christians or anyone else who object to homosexuality for religious reasons. This means they intend to make sure that any Christians in business will be required to demonstrate public approval and support of the moral goodness of homosexuality by providing services for gay affirming events and activities, even though they consider them to be immoral (weddings, education, rooms at your B&B, etc.). This ultimately implies, no exemption for churches that do not want to hire a gay pastor, no exemptions for pastors or churches from performing or hosting a gay wedding, and most probably, loss of tax exemption for any non-profit, including churches and other ministries, for anything less than full-acceptance and support.

Based on this type of mentality, it would appear that no disapproval of homosexuality will be tolerated in your workplace, school, business or anywhere else. One can only assume that the goal is to silence any opposition using the full force of the law. It seems as though they have no intention of a live and let live approach. It looks much more like live and crush all dissent. It is significant that the ACLU’s defense of religion in the public square does not extend to its own perception as to where your religion might violate what it views as the legal rights of others. If they think your freedom of religion violates the civil rights of gays, then too bad for your freedom of religion. We should not kid ourselves. They think their right to a wedding cake trumps your right to own a business and not be required to participate in an activity that you find deeply morally offensive. It makes no difference to them that the cake could be catered by a dozen other shops in your area. The theme here is civil rights for me, but not for thee. Active persecution has already begun, and based on what I saw we can expect more of the same.

With this, the moral teaching of virtually every philosophical and religious system for all of history will be banished from public discourse. Christian moral teaching on sexuality will be essentially criminalized, persecuted, and repressed. It might be allowed as private opinion, but its practice in the public sphere will be demonized by hostile media, slandered and undermined by schools supported by Christian taxpayers, and prohibited and penalized by law.

This is nothing less than a full scale declaration of war against the First Amendment’s guarantee of our most basic and important liberty. While I have been ready to give the benefit of a doubt to those promoting gay marriage up until now, I see that this was a mistake. Esseks has revealed that he and others who think like him are, in fact, enemies of liberty and enemies of the Constitution. They are hypocrites who speak of tolerance but who are thoroughly intolerant of any religious and moral view that contradicts their own.

Most revealing was his response when asked about Justice Scalia’s dissent. He disparaged it as being typical Scalia; reactionary, etc. This, plus his glowing praise of Justice Kennedy’s opinion was telling. He sidestepped the opportunity to criticize Kennedy’s hateful, libelous, and bigoted diatribe against supporters of traditional marriage. Could it be that Esseks holds to the same intolerant anti-Christian bigotry? Until he says other wise we are justified in saying that it sure looks that way.

Esseks and his crew have already filed suit in PA and NC to force the national recognition of same sex marriage. These people are relentless in the pursuit of their goals, and I fear, in their hatred of traditional Christianity. It is past time to recognize that we are in a life and death battle for our most basic Constitutional rights.