Reality Check 101

There are plenty of things for conservatives to be frustrated about these days.  Lawlessness in large cities seems to be spreading without significant action from mayors and governors.  The history of our great nation is openly being attacked on an almost daily basis.  In the last few months, the most fundamental rights of faith and conscience have been weakened by our own Supreme Court.  Yet, there has been no Tea Party-like uprising.  Too much of the time, conservatives are their own worst enemies.

Now comes the fair city of Holland Michigan’s turn to participate in the conflict.  Since the first of June, the city council has been grappling with the issue of protections, via ordinance, for publicly-expressed LGBTQIA lifestyles in housing, employment, and other forms of privately-owned venues.

This has hit the place people call home and it has been discouraging.  Judging by attendance, local conservatives have been either in the dark or unwilling to sacrifice their Wednesday evenings. As of July 22^nd, during both business sessions on the 1^st and 3^rd Wednesdays (6:30pm) and study sessions on 2^nd and 4^th Wednesdays (5:30pm), conservatives have been represented by only three or four of the same individuals with in-person remarks – no conservative pastors or church representatives or other voices of conservative convictions.  At the same time, every week, there has been an orchestrated presence of the same gay activists, pro-gay mental health professionals and liberal pastors.  Their attendance has been anywhere between two-to-four times that of those four conservatives.

First, some more facts before opinion.  Take a look at the proposed provisions of the ordinance are on the city’s website: 

Sec. 25-3. Prohibition of Discrimination – “No person or persons shall discriminate against any person or persons within the City regarding:  (a) Employment; (b) The advertising, listing, showing, inspection, negotiation, purchase, sale, exchange, ownership, or financing an interest in real property or the leasing or occupancy of real property; (c) Public accommodations; or (d) Public services on the basis of age, race, national origin, color, disability, education, familial status, sex, sexual orientation, gender expression, gender identity, height, marital status, religion, source of income or weight.”

25-4. lists exemptions: (g)Any conduct lawfully protected by the Holland City Charter or by the Michigan Constitution or the United States Constitution.  Section 25-9 is significant:  Sec. 25-9. Interpretation. (b) Not be read to prohibit or interfere with a person’s, or a religious institution’s, free exercise of religion.

Notice the excerpt from 25-4 and 25-9.  It references only the “exercise of religion” and “religious institutions”.  From the liberal point of view, declared many times over the course of public comments, generic religion is fine as long as it stays at home, in the church, or in one’s head.  This is what the ordinance protects.  Nothing more.

Throughout the entirety of Holland’s city council deliberations, the majority has refused to address the elephants in the room:

*The fact that gay activists are not tolerant or gracious toward conservative “religion”. To deny this is to be either willfully ignorant of movement’s history, and stated intentions or, worse, is being disingenuous.

*The well-documented intention to conquer public speech, private businesses, athletics, and services.

* The vocal prejudice of LGBTQIA activists against conscience and faith dissent by conservatives.

*  Claims of inhospitality, intolerance, and unenlightened group-think (ignorance) which cannot be objectively countered without context and observation.

* The purely ideological equivalence of homosexual rights with human rights.

*The refusal of the council’s majority to deal with the America and Holland of 2020 instead of 2011.

* Most destressing of all, the steadfast refusal by the council’s majority to publicly respond to challenges from conservative speakers.

The constant mantra of employment and housing abuses in Holland is a fable.  We are not 2011. Any objective person should defy any council person or speaker to show, in this day and age, especially after the latest Supreme Court decisions, the existence of any employer or other public accommodation who would dare act against anyone of the gay community strictly because of their sexual status.  In reality, employers and public accommodations cater to the LGBTQIA community knowing that there is a constant danger of social and legal consequences lurking over their shoulders.

Finally, the idea that the gay rights campaign has overwhelming support is ludicrous on its face.  Because there has been a lack of objective, concerted, outreach to the community at-large by Holland’s city council – no voting, no forums, no polling, no published text of the proposed amendment – there can be no consensus.  If it is accurate that 13% of Holland residents voted in council elections, how are we to believe that even 51% have any idea what has been proposed?  This will impact the city as nothing else thus far?  Maybe its time for honest investigation and 2020 integrity.