Rebuttal: The LGBT Mafia Demands Conformity or Destruction


We are a diverse group here at United Liberty, and we’re not afraid to challenge each other. That said, this is a rebuttal to an earlier post on the RFRA fracas in Indiana. Debate is democracy.


“No one understood better than Stalin that the true object of propaganda is neither to convince nor even to persuade, but to produce a uniform pattern of public utterance in which the first trace of unorthodox thought immediately reveals itself as a jarring dissonance.” ~ Alan Bullock, British Historian


Not for the first time, and certainly not for the last time, the political Left (and some libertarian allies) have attempted to declare victory on an issue by redefining the terms, maligning dissenters, and using strong-arm tactics to suppress dissent in the debate over homosexual “marriage” and “gay rights”. Watching the hysteria and outrage over Indiana’s recently signed Religious Freedom Restoration Act, one would think conservative Christians were attacking homosexuals with fire hoses and attack dogs.

So it is that I must respectfully take issue with the assertions of my more socially liberal friends, who paint the RFRA legislation as an instrument of discrimination, relegating homosexuals (and bisexuals and transgendered, and the dozens of other sub-categories of sexual “identities” that one may now claim to have – like a Baskin Robbins of sexual preferences) to the status of “second class citizenship”.

Because We’re Not Afraid of Debate: RFRA Madness —Marriage Support May Suffer, But That’s a Good Thing

RFRA desormeaux


This was originally posted at Cynicus Prime.

One of the most startling memes I’ve seen in the wake of the Indiana RFRA debate is the swift retreat by many conservatives from their previously stated support for same-sex marriage equality. Many analysts expect this kind of pushback when an issue becomes as heated as this one has. The pendulum swings back and forth, they say, and perhaps RFRA was the top of the equal rights swing and now the descent begins. Maybe, maybe not. But the pushback we’ve seen here is incredibly instructive, and ultimately worth the price for an honest public debate.

I couldn’t scroll my Twitter timeline at any point on Wednesday without someone saying they were now rethinking or abandoning their support for gay marriage after Indiana. They had reluctantly agreed that marriage would be ok, but to have their businesses hired to (not at all) participate in them? Fascism! Totalitarianism!

At first blush, this sounds like an unfortunate setback for the LGBT equal rights movement. Polls may soon show a softening of national support for marriage equality. Well, I say it’s about time. The emergent consensus was a fairy tale. It was too good to be true.

Obamacare: Reasons to Hope and Ways to Opt-Out

Things have been so disappointing for people that lean right for so many years now that there’s a general tendency toward hopelessness and cynicism when it comes to believing that anyone on the Hill represents their interests. After all, it’s tough to battle brute accusations of racism and obstruction with reasoned arguments concerning economic struggles and the inefficiencies of wealth transfer.

At some point, people just get angry and lose faith. But take heart conservatives and libertarians: there are people within the district and around the country working on your behalf:

A federal judge in the District of Columbia will hear oral arguments on Tuesday in one of several cases brought by states including Indiana and Oklahoma, along with business owners and individual consumers, who say that the law does not grant the Internal Revenue Service authority to provide tax credits or subsidies to people who buy insurance through the federal exchange.

…The subsidy lawsuits grow out of three years of work by conservative and libertarian theorists at Washington-based research organizations like the Cato Institute, the American Enterprise Institute and the Competitive Enterprise Institute. The cases are part of a continuing, multifaceted legal assault on the Affordable Care Act that began with the Supreme Court challenge to the law and shows no signs of abating.

A nation of sheep

Every culture has its romantic ideal.  In Europe, it’s the knight.  In the Middle East, it’s the army of Saladin.  In the United States, it’s still the cowboy.  The heroic lone wolf, standing for what is right amidst a sea of contradictions and solves the problems of the world all on his lonesome.  The outward display of that figure, the six-gun dangling from his hip, his fingertips just millimeters from it, is primarily the work of fiction.  There have been far more Hollywood showdowns at high noon than the real Old West.

Instead, the ideal itself, the rugged individualist, has taken a tremendous beating over the years.  We are being conditioned to shut up and take whatever is dealt to us.  Instead of conditioning people to be Marshal Dillon, our young people are being taught to be the damsel in distress.

Recently, the State of Indiana Supreme Court ruled that a man doesn’t have a right to resist law enforcement entering your home without your consent, or a warrant.  It spurred up a firestorm of controversy, but it’s hardly the first move in this direction.

For years, there have been states that have what is called a “retreat first” law.  These laws require someone to try to leave the site of a potential violent encounter rather than permitting them to defend themselves.  This also includes retreating from your own home should someone break in.  You, the lawful citizen, must act in a manner that empowers the criminal element.  Thank God Georgia isn’t one of those states.

The moves all push towards creating a nation of docile subjects who turn to the state for the answers to their problems.  There are arguments now that guns aren’t necessary because the police will protect us.  Of course, the Supreme Court case Castle Rock v. Gonzales says otherwise.

Catching up on Wisconsin

The protests in Wisconsin against Gov. Scott Walker’s budget proposal that would require public-sector workers to pay more for benefits and pensions, though they’ll still be better off than private-sector workers, and reforms that would limit collective bargaining by public-sector unions are still receiving an incredible amount of attention.

In case you haven’t seen it, here is video a speech Gov. Walker gave last night explaining the reasons for the proposal. You can read the transcript here:

Walker, who has been falsely accused of favoring certain public-sector unions, has warned that unless the measures are passed to help ensure that the $3 billion budget deficit over the next two years can be cut, 6,000 public workers could lose their jobs.

Podcast: Liberty Candidate - Marlin Stutzman (U.S. Senate - Indiana)

Continuing our “Liberty Candidate Series” of interviews, Jason and Brett talk with Marlin Stutzman, discussing the retirement of Evan Bayh (D-IN), Hoosier jobs, energy policy, and fiscal conservatism.  Stutzman is one of five Republican candidates seeking the Republican nomination for Indiana’s U.S. Senate seat this year.

This special edition podcast is the seventh in a series devoted to showcasing liberty candidates nationwide.

You can download the podcast here. The introduction music is “Silence is Violence” by the always lovely Aimee Allen.

You can subscribe to the RSS of JUST our podcasts here, or you can find our podcasts on iTunes here.

Bayh’s Retirement Not Hurting Democrats As Much As Most Think It Will

After absorbing the news from every outlet on earth yesterday, even our own editor’s take, on the “surprise” retirement of Indiana Democrat Evan Bayh, I have to say that analysts are not considering all the “good” that can come from his retirement from the U.S. Senate.  It seems that everyone predicts a Republican to pick up his seat in November.  Lately, I have been among the few to see some things that ebb against the accepted flow in analyzing races and situations.  This is another such ebb.

I think the reason that Bayh waited until Presidents’ Day to announce his retirement was to prevent someone relatively unknown, like Tamyra d’Ippolito, from garnering the nomination without a primary election AND without their seal of approval by collecting the requisite signatures necessary to get on the primary ballot.  The Democrats have an opportunity to select a candidate, since it seems that d’Ippolito did not achieve the 4500 signatures necessary to get on the ballot.  If she had, that is the WORST CASE SCENARIO for Democrats.  By waiting, Bayh almost assured that the state Democrat Party could spend time vetting, choosing and fundraising for someone “moderate” enough to win the state, but “progressive” enough to fully support the agenda of the party for the next six years.  While d’Ippolito likely fills out the latter, there is no chance she can accommodate the former.

Here’s your dark horse Republican presidential candidate

There have been a number of names mentioned as potential Republican presidential candidates, each with their own niche. You have Chris Christie and Jeb Bush from the establishment, Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum as the social conservatives, and Rand Paul and Ted Cruz from the grassroots base of the party.

While some have said that Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI) could get a look, one name that has been flying under the radar, at least until recently, and could prove to be a formidable candidate is Gov. Mike Pence (R-IN).

Many pundits have opined that the Republican Party will need to nominate a governor in 2016, someone with executive experience. The usual names mentioned in the next breath are Christie and Bush as well as Bobby Jindal and Scott Walker.

Though he’s only been in office for a short time, Pence, who is been quietly making the rounds at some Republican state convention, has legislative experience and, now, executive experience. As Philip Klein explains, Pence also has something that the other Republican governors lack — limited government, grassroots credentials:

Indiana becomes first state to withdraw from Common Core

Mike Pence

Gov. Mike Pence (R-IN) signed a measure, SB 91, yesterday that will withdraw Indiana from Common Core, a controversial education initiative crafted by the National Governors Association and backed by the Obama administration:

Indiana was among 45 states that in recent years adopted Common Core standards spelling out what students should be learning in math and reading at each grade level. Some conservatives have since criticized the initiative as a top-down takeover of local schools, and in signing legislation Monday to pull Indiana from the program, Republican Gov. Mike Pence trumpeted the move as a victory for state-level action.

“I believe when we reach the end of this process there are going to be many other states around the country that will take a hard look at the way Indiana has taken a step back, designed our own standards and done it in a way where we drew on educators, we drew on citizens, we drew on parents and developed standards that meet the needs of our people,” Pence said.

The state began moving away from Common Core last year, when Indiana lawmakers “paused” its implementation. This year, the Republican-controlled Legislature approved a measure requiring the State Board of Education to draft new benchmarks for students.

Great news, right? The legislation rejects Common Core in name only. The Indiana Board of Education is drafting new standards that would keep much of the initiative in place, meaning that legislation signed by Pence could prove meaningless:

Republicans urge Obama to back measure allowing Americans to keep health plans

 Todd Young

The weekend before the House of Representatives plan to vote on legislation that would give Americans the choice to keep their health plans, Republicans used their weekly address to discuss insurance cancellations caused by Obamacare and to promote the Keep Your Plan Act.

Rep. Todd Young (R-IN), who was tasked with giving the address this week, read some examples of heartbreaking stories his offices has received from constituents who have seen their health plans canceled and noted the financial impact the law is having on their families.

“Mike from Bloomington wrote in to say that the plan he has now – which he likes – is being canceled at the end of the year. This, of course, is exactly what the president and other champions of the law promised would not happen,” said Young. “Mike’s new plan will cost him $900 more a month.”

“And there’s Marvin from Bloomington, who shared with me this cancelation notice his wife, Kathy, received. To avoid a lapse in coverage, she must sign up for a new plan,” he noted. “I held up this letter last week at a hearing with the Medicare administrator responsible for the exchange.  Her suggestion was that Marvin and Kathy go to the website.”

This couple, the Indiana Republican said, woke up in the middle to the night to try to get on the federal Obamacare exchange to no avail. They gave up after a month of trying to get through the glitchy website, and will now pay more for a health plan outside of the exchange.

“This is what betrayal looks like,” he said. “Here you have hardworking people who were repeatedly told not to worry, that their coverage would stay the same and — if anything — their costs would go down. Just the opposite is happening.”

The views and opinions expressed by individual authors are not necessarily those of other authors, advertisers, developers or editors at United Liberty.