DEFENDING NATURAL FAMILY

THE SEPARATION OF LGBT AND STATE

Exclusive: Scott Lively on how Trump can take government's pro-'gay' thumb off the scale

In his first few days, President Trump has proved to be an American hero in the mold of President Ronald Reagan, and he should follow Reagan’s lead on “gay” issues. 

Like Mr. Trump, Ronald Reagan rightly had a high level of respect for homosexuals as persons, but as president, Reagan recognized his duty to protect society from the destructive “gay” agenda, whose goal since the Stonewall Riots of 1969 is not tolerance but absolute cultural supremacy. 

He fulfilled that duty by appointing the pre-eminent jurist of the 20th century, Antonin Scalia, to the United States Supreme Court. Justice Scalia then wrote the majority opinion in Bowers v. Hardwick (1986), which recognized the clear constitutional authority of all 50 states to regulate harmful sexual conduct, specifically including sodomy. (Mr. Trump should remember this when appointing Justice Scalia’s replacement.)

It is very hopeful that one of President Trump’s first acts in office was to scrub the White House website of references to the LGBT agenda, which had been Barack Obama’s top global priority. 

The euphemistically named Human Rights Campaign (HRC) condemned the move, but I vigorously applaud it and would like to offer a few suggestions for how the Trump administration should deal with LGBT issues.

HRC named me it’s public enemy No. 1 in a 2014 report titled “Exporters of Hate,” funded by the Grima Wormtongue of the GOP, billionaire Paul Singer. 

As it does with every person who disagrees even in the slightest manner with the notion of “gay” cultural supremacy, HRC and its ilk cast my reasoned opposition as malicious “homophobia” and imply that we pro-family advocates want homosexuals to be persecuted and purged from society. 

However, my true agenda has always been a matter of public record: a balance between the need of society to preserve the primacy of authentic marriage and the natural family as its norm, with the original demand of the LGBT coalition to enjoy a right to privacy behind closed doors.

When I ran for governor of Massachusetts in 2014, my platform was quite similar in several key aspects to that of Mr. Trump, and in fact I sometimes wondered if his campaign manager had read my website. (The biggest difference was I stated openly and often that I didn’t run to win, but only to have a platform to promote biblical values in the political arena.) At the start of my effort in November 2012, I laid out what was then a unique populist vision for Republicans, in an article titled “Time for a New Coalition in the GOP.”

Later, when I began actively campaigning across Massachusetts, I issued a White Paper regarding “gay” issues, on the theme of “Separation of LGBT and State”:

“… Nearly every legal, social and political battle in American society today pits LGBT activists against Christians,” I wrote. “In and of itself, the contest between LGBT activists and Christians is not a problem. 

Questions about the Christian heritage of the United States aside, we are a nation based in substantial part on the theory of a social contract whose terms are set by the people. Vigorous public debate about what our public policy should be is healthy and beneficial.

“The problem is that government has put its thumb on the scale favoring the LGBT agenda, while Christians are limited by the so-called ‘Separation of Church and State,’ a phrase not found in our constitution, but which has nevertheless been determined by activist judges to be the law of the land.

“I propose this playing field be leveled by the establishment of a new legal and policy doctrine creating the ‘Separation of LGBT and State.’ 

The government should be prohibited from endorsing or promoting LGBT political goals or philosophy in precisely the same way that it is prohibited from promoting religion. 

Under my policy proposal, individual freedom of speech and association would be preserved, providing a balance between the needs of public health and private rights.

For example, government would no longer be allowed to promote the legitimacy of homosexual, bisexual and transgender conduct in public schools, but students could still form student clubs based on their personal choices. 

 LGBT groups could establish community organizations, but no taxpayer money could be used to create or support them. … In every way that Christianity is restricted in public life, the LGBT agenda should be restricted.”

I went on to state that in contests between Christian and LGBT activists, the First Amendment must always trump “sexual orientation” regulations.

I urge President Trump to amend all existing sexual orientation regulations with following clause:

“In no circumstance shall sexual orientation regulations supersede the First Amendment rights of individuals, churches and religious organizations to freedom of speech and the free exercise of religion.

“For the purpose of this statute religious organizations are those whose policies or culture are substantially influenced by religious values, including but not limited to Christian bookstores, adoption agencies, hospitals, businesses, social organizations and student clubs on college campuses.”

I don’t have a conduit to the Trump administration, but someone reading this article probably does. Please ask President Trump to establish a “Separation of LGBT and State” to take the government’s pro-“gay” thumb off the scale and give the American faith community a fighting chance to restore the natural family to its rightful place as the heart and foundation of our society.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/01/the-separation-of-lgbt-and-state/#SkC2qTrsLUZMqDsO.99