Story #1:  Chick-fil-A cuts donations to two religious organizations after pressure from LGBT group.

A group of Americans formed a boycott against an American company based on their charitable contributions to two specific organizations.  In the end, the company capitulated and modified their charitable practices to exclude contributions to those two organizations.  Note, I am purposely leaving out names right now as it does not matter who the groups involved are.

To restate what happened, a group of Americans did not like two non-profit organizations receiving money and they protested against an organization giving them money.  Organizing a boycott is protected under Freedom of Speech and as such I fully support the right to do so.  However, selective targeting of two organizations and then working to hurt people and companies who support those organizations is going a bit too far for my taste.  I see this as only the beginning of the end because if our media functioned correctly, the group of Americans targeting companies with their boycotts wouldn’t gain the needed attention to be successful.  Now I have to name names.

The first organization targeted by the group of Americans was founded in 1865…the Salvation Army has been around for over 154 years and provide a great deal of community support.

The second organization targeted was founded in 1954…the Fellowship of Christian Athletes has been around for over 65 years and works to promote a relationship with Jesus Christ among coaches and athletes.

The group of Americans targeting these two organizations is only identified as a LGBT Organization.  Their complaint against the Salvation Army asks its’ members to refrain from gay sex.  The complaint against the FCA is pretty much the same.

On the facts, the LGBT organization has every right to file their boycott.  Both organization have openly voice opposition to the LGBT lifestyle.  Being a true conservative and die hard capitalist, in a fair fight, I have to agree to the tactics of the LGBT group.  However, this is not a fair fight and thus capitalism is not really in play.

With capitalism, companies are influenced by consumer behavior.  If the public disagrees with a company decision, then they can boycott with hopes of changing behavior.  One way the public wins in boycott battles is if the media gets involved in the story and makes the facts known.  In a normal America, the media would report the facts and remain neutral in the conflict…but in today’s America, the media is firmly behind the liberal agenda and socialist dogma.  In essences, this boycott against Chick-fli-A is not a fair capitalistic fight because the media has chosen a side and works to help their side win.  The media is no longer reporting the news, they are helping make the news.  It is almost like a movie production where the script to this diabolical plot was written deep in the basements of CNN, MSNBC, ABC, and CBS (to name just a few.)  

This is not capitalism, this is fascism.  But wait, the rabbit hole goes much deeper.  

Story #2:  PayPal to cut off donations to right-wing YouTube Stefan Molyneux following Social Media Divestment Campaign

PayPal CEO Dan Schulman admitted during an interview with the Wall Street Journal that PayPal works with the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) when it considers blacklisting conservatives.  Over the last couple of years, PayPal has banned several conservatives from using their payment processing system for processing donations.  Stefan Molyneux was just the most recent.  I don’t know Stefan from adam, never listened to his shows, never visited his blog site.  I don’t even know what the color of of politics are…what I do know is he is an American.  In America, the constitution guarantees us the right to free speech.  That does not mean speech comes without consequences…but we are not talking about yelling fire in a crowded movie theater, we are talking about a business refusing to provide a service to a consumer because of a political ideology.  Why is the ACLA not intervening in the case of conservatives being banned from doing business because of politics?  

Let’s turn the page back a few years to a bakery in Gresham Oregon.  The owners refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay wedding because it went against their religious believes.  The couple who owned the bakery were sued, fined by the state and run out of business.  Recently an appeals court ruled in favor of the bakery owners, but too late, damage done.  

On one side we have religious freedoms and on the other political freedoms.  Both types of speech are protected by the constitution, as ruled by the Supreme Court, however one side is able to ignore the constitution while the other is crushed.

PayPal is able to refuse service to people they believe is guilty of hate speech.  Nice sleight of hand trick with the words.  In the eyes of the left, it is no longer political speech, it is hate speech and they feel obligated to censor it.  So far there has not been a challenge taken to the highest court, but on doubt a case will make it some day.  The problem is, in the mean time, conservatives who make a living with their voice are being destroyed or extremely hampered in their ability to earn a living.  Mean while, the couple who observed their religious freedoms was sued into oblivion.  The bakers can not refuse service because the left deems their service (baking a cake) a civil right.  Insert joke here.

As a man who tips the scale around 300 pounds, I might agree eating cake is a civil right, but my cardiologist strongly disagrees.  Bastard!

These first two stories shows the hypocrisy of the progressive agenda and how the media allows them to get away with the crime.  On one side of the coin, Progressives remove the ability to collect donations from supporters of conservative publications; however not he other side of the coin, the same Progressives are working to restrict who businesses donate money too.  They are literally working to get us coming and going…and the main stream media is sitting by loving every minute.

Story #3:  Protecting freedom of religion leads to greater peace and stability.

Story number three is from the perspective of Kay Cole James, President of the Heritage Foundation.  The thesis of her story “Protecting Religious Liberty” is ‘When religious freedoms aren’t respected, violence and conflict can result’ and ‘Governments that respect religious liberty also display greater peace and stability.’

Let’s take a breadth here…this is starting to get confusing, I know.  If it is true that religious liberty leads to peace, then trying to end religious liberty is an effort to instigate discord and violence.  

In the name of protecting people from hate speech, our religious liberties are being squashed.  The rights granted by God to every American citizens are being selectively applied by the Progressive ruling class and supported by the media.  Just like the Chick-fli-A story where a boycott requires media attention, the media is giving aid and comfort to the people working to violate American’s constitutional rights.  Why?

Eliminating God from the public square has been a very public goal of the Progressive left for over a decade now.  It started with the war on Christmas.  Just like when the media made fun of President Trump calling the immigrant caravans a national security threat, the media ridiculed those who said there was a war on Christmas.  Boycotts have been the only effective weapon against stores that capitulate to the fascist mod demands; but with a generation of our children now viewing socialism in a favorable light, it will not be long before God is expelled from America and our country devolves into a civil war.  Might that be the actual goal of the Progressives?  Civil war?

To take full control, Marshall Law must be declared.  Marshall Law is only called in cases of extreme civil unrest—Watts Riots, Rodney King Verdict, etc.  So it makes sense the goal is to push America to the breaking point so absolute control can be taken.  OK, now I am sounding like a conspiracy nut.  Cvil war, Marshall Law all from PayPal refusing to allow payment processing?

I would love to be wrong on this one.  I would love this to be nothing more than an extreme coincidence or for me to be way off the mark in misinterpreting the meaning of recent events.  But let’s get back to what should conservatives do about the Chick-fli-A and PayPal knowledge?

Nothing.  Eat chicken, don’t eat chicken, but don’t cry to the media for help—they helped create the problems.  Let the market place solve these problems.  If Chick-fli-A is going to abandon the Christian majority who frequent their restaurants, then they will lose money, profits will drop, and the share holders and take corrective action.  Complaining to the media just gives Progressives fuel for the fire and they love to stock that fire.  They love being able to say, “see, now conservatives are mad at Chick-fli-A…”  In the case of PayPal, just like the bakery in Oregon, there are lots of other choices for payment processing.  With 70 million plus businesses in American, half or more run by conservative Americans, the power of the almighty dollar will ultimately solve this problem.  If 35 million businesses abandon PayPal their shareholders will take corrective action.  In the mean time, another payment processor will have the opportunity to gain marketshare.

Believe in capitalism and being the resourceful Americans that built this country into the greatest super power on the face of the planet.  Talk with your friends and be comfortable with civil political discussion.  Don’t allow the Progressive agenda to drive you further into seclusion.  Don’t let companies like PayPal, Google and Facebook scare you into hiding your believes and feelings.  Share your feelings with your friends, openly discuss politics—keep it civil and non-judgmental, but don’t give up the battlefield to these Progressive thugs.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.