Those of you who never miss my TBN TV show “Huckabee” (and if you have missed it, you can see past episodes here, so there’s really no excuse:  https://www.tbn.org/programs/huckabee/episodes) will remember my April 28th interview with Cabot Phillips of CampusReform.org.  He’s the young man who bravely ventures out into America’s university campuses armed only with camera and microphone and asks students questions guaranteed to trigger them into running for the nearest Play Doh-equipped safe space.  Well, he has a new video up, and it’s a must-see.

 

In this one, he interviews George Washington University students about the Supreme Court decision in favor of Colorado Christian baker Jack Phillips.  The question: should a Christian baker be forced to take a job making a same-sex wedding cake if it violates his religious beliefs? 

 

The predictable response from some students who’ve spent too much time steeping in the PC culture of leftist professors: of course he should, because baking is his job and he has no right to say no to anyone.  As one poetically put it, “His ability to exercise his freedom of religion ends when that infringes on another person’s ability to be who they are.” 

 



Quite moving.  But hold on: there are follow-up questions.  What if the baker is Jewish; should he be forced to bake a cake for a Palestinian wedding?  What if he’s black; does he have to cater a KKK rally?  One young woman who sides with the Jewish and black bakers admits that she’s contradicting what she just said about the Christian baker.  What’s really happening is that she’s undergoing the uncomfortable process of having to examine something from a different point of view than she’s accustomed to, which used to be one of the main reasons for attending college before it was outlawed. 

 

Watch to the end: it’s surprising and heartening to see how many students actually side with religious freedom, including one who knows enough about the case to realize how badly Colorado authorities discriminated against the baker because of his religion.   

 

If I could add one more question, it would be, “If the baker were Muslim; should he be forced to cater a same-sex wedding reception?”  Only I wouldn’t ask that of students, I’d ask it of the people who keep filing lawsuits against Christian bakers that subject them to bankruptcy and death threats, but they never seem to target Muslim bakeries.  Is it because they fear Muslims would retaliate, because that's awfully Islamophobic? And if so, does that mean they only target people they think won’t fight back, since that’s the very definition of bullying, and I thought they were opposed to bullying? 

 

I read that during an acceptance speech on the Tony Awards, an actor in the gay-themed play “Angels in America” got a big ovation for taking a stand for tolerance by declaring, “Let’s just bake a cake for everyone who wants a cake to be baked!”  It was a perfect illustration of the lack of empathy in the insular world of the self-appointed tolerance police. 

 

Obviously, their definition of tolerance is a perfect world in which everyone sees things their way.  Real tolerance would be religious people not trying to force them to live in a way that complies with their sacred beliefs, and them not trying to force religious people to comply with things that violate their sacred beliefs.  No matter where you stand on any issue, using force of government to make everyone say and do only the things you approve of is not tolerance.  It’s totalitarianism.   

 

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=11009

 

LEAVE ME A COMMENT BELOW BY CLICKING HERE.  I READ THEM!

Millennial of the Year

May 23, 2018

I think we’ve found the winner of the Millennial of the Year Award.

Mark and Christina Rotondo of upstate New York tried everything to get their 30-year-old son Michael, who’s been living in their house for the past eight years, to move out already. They offered him advice, pleaded with him to get a job and get his life together, gave him $1100 for moving expenses (he took the money but didn’t use it to move), cut off his food and phone, and finally resorted to sending him a legal eviction letter ordering him to vacate.

So, of course, he took them to court to fight it. Acting as his own attorney, he told the judge that his parents’ behavior toward him has been “really unfair to me and really outrageous,” and that “I don’t think trying to destroy someone is tough love.” He claims to have an income and a successful business, although he didn’t specify what that was; and he noted that he has a son himself, although he doesn’t have custody (there’s a surprise.) He said he plans to move out, just not today, or in 30 days, but he said he can’t imagine still being in his parents’ house three months from now (I’ll bet they can imagine it.) He claimed that three months is “reasonable;” still, he asked the judge to order his parents to let him stay for another six months. The judge called that request “outrageous” and ordered the parents’ lawyer to draft an order outlining terms of the eviction. But until an official eviction date is set, the judge allowed Michael to remain in his parents' home!

This is going to make for an awkward Thanksgiving dinner. Yes, I know Thanksgiving is more than three months away. Want to bet he’ll still be there?

https://nypost.com/2018/05/22/parents-win-suit-to-kick-deadbeat-son-out-of-their-house/