Show Notes: They are kinda related,,, (Pt 2)

 

Stop Kerri Rivera, autism quacks and abusive "treatments" for autism

NICOL!!

If you remember from part 1, we discussed a general overview of the First Amendment and how it is ONLY speaking of and to governmental entities and their representatives (public vs private sector employment).  The First Amendment has no jurisdiction between private parties, such as the "cases" of Phil Robertson or Andrew Wakefield, although there are certain caveats (ie violations concerning anti-discrimination laws, or what I call faux religious liberty cases,  BUT you have to bear in mind those cases then are no longer 1st Amendment issues even when said violation may be religious in nature). 

You may say whatever you want - again with some caveats (ie yelling fire in a crowded theater) - the gov't can not shut you down although they can place restrictions for public safety (such as safety zones at family planning clinics or a buffer zone at a political rally). 

A private entity may disagree and they may criticize you BUT they do not have to provide a platform for your speech.  Ultimately that is what the Azucar Bakery case was about in Colorado.  Marjorie Silva, the defendant, maintained throughout, "[i]n the same manner we would not … make a discriminatory cake against Christians, we will not make one that discriminates against gays."

Where Phillips went wrong is that he out-right refused a service/product (providing a wedding cake) that he normally provides to any other customer. Where Silva went right, "[i]n the same manner we would not … make a discriminatory cake against Christians, we will not make one that discriminates against gays."

Where Jack went wrong, he assumed Silva would cow-tow to his wishes because he is a Christian and his beliefs are sacrosanct and should never be questioned. Where Silva went right, "[i]n the same manner we would not … make a discriminatory cake against Christians, we will not make one that discriminates against gays."

In a similar vane, it is also why Phil Robertson had no leg to stand on against A&E.  As a private company, A&E had certain standards for employees, in their determination Robertson didn’t meet said standards.  End of story.

In a nut shell that is the situation being faced by Andrew Wakefield; a lying con-man with no moral integrity.  Tribeca is a private entity who chose, after receiving horrible public backlash, not to screen the his film.  Contrary to opinion, the powerful elite had nothing to do with this.  There is no conspiracy.

Although this IS SATIRE,  this article sums up the general sentiment concerning our view of documentaries.

We also learned that the same tenet applies in regards to religion.  The gov't has to be hand off in endorsing a specific religion and that hands off approach has to be across the board.  It has to be equal to all religions.  In other words Christianity and its variants (what we here in the States are most familiar with) can not be given preferential treatment over any other religion.  What is good for the goose, is good for the gander.

That is one of the underlying arguments you will find concerning the SB277 issue in California.  Parents can no longer use religion to exempt a child from the required school vaccines. 

If you remember SB277 eliminated non-medical exemptions for mandated vaccination in regards to schooling.  As I have mentioned, its passing has created a little cottage industry.  A point that Orac notes concerning Dr Bob Sears:  “SB 277 is generally a good law, but it’s definitely not perfect. Perhaps its most glaring weakness is that all that it requires for a child to obtain a medical exemption is a letter from the child’s doctor. In other words, any physician can provide a letter for parents to use to get a vaccine mandate.” [See also:  Now what? Will SB 277 enrich antivaccine doctors? and SB 277 advances, and antivaccine activists lose it (again)]

Remember my bit on MMS?  The MMS protocol is actually part of the Genesis II Church sacraments. Jim Humble made it as such to attempt to bypass the SOCAS issue by injecting religious bullshit.

For example, these are statements within a longer statement by Humble,

I also told him that we have given interviews to CNN, BBC, Sky News and others with none of them reporting what I said so why waste our time. He was persistent about finding out if we cure breast cancer. I finally told him that by the Sacraments of the Genesis II Church we have treated, cured and healed breast cancer. He was appalled that I would say those forbidden words “cure, heal or treat”. Forbidden by the FDA, U.S. Justice system maybe, but not a Church! Maybe the AMA can't say that because they are not set up to “cure” anything but only treat symptoms. I told him that he could see for himself testimonies of many diseases “cured” with the Genesis II Church sacraments. People from all over the world are being “restored to health” with the protocols of our Church. ABC released an article and a two - night coverage of a so-called “investigation” into the “unorthodox underworld” of the Genesis II Church. Here is what was aired.
,,,
As you can see we brought up a different side of the issue that they cannot and will not cover. The only places we have seen our story get out is the alternative media and even many of them are afraid to cover what we do as a Church. The time is now to make a stand against this evil that is destroying our world. This Bible verse sums it up for about who we are really fighting. “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places”, Ephesians 6:12 King James Bible. Whether you believe the Bible or not those that are well read in history and have their eyes open know this to be truth throughout history.

While Humble is still active in the debacle he created, a more recent news release is telling.  This one is dated December 4, 2015 from Archbishop Mark S. Grenon: 

We have prepared a Religious Exemption letter to be given to any government or private organization as a statement of our beliefs about vaccines and other issues regarding toxins entering our body, i.e. “our temple”. If anyone needs this letter please contact us at,,,

This statement, was in regards to a woman who wanted to volunteer as a hospice.

To Humble and his ilk, I have this to say, Why the FUCK would you volunteer at a hospice or such without being vaccinated - the elderly, the ill and immune compromised DIE from flu complications, EASILY. Fuck Jim Humble and his cult.

I get personally peeved at this becasue it is attitude such as this that caused my issue with staph/ MRSA.  Which BTW almost derailed my eye surgery 18 months after the fact.

Bishop Kerri Rivera (and Bishop Andreas Kalcker, a oft co-hort) takes it one step further, in her "curing" of autism, with the purging of parasites and intestinal lining (ropeworms) via the ingestion of CLO2 and CLO2 enemas.

https://www.facebook.com/therealcrediblehulk/photos/a.892787380752581.1073741828.892778157420170/1086814234683227/?type=3&theater
Sorry, but not sorry for the gross picture.  This is what the parents are sifting through their child's poop for.  This occurs daily if not more.

Another example, this 2-part tutorial from Kerri Rivera and in it she describes how to make a 3000ppm CLO2 solution:

A far cry from the recommended concentration for treating our water supply.

What I found interesting,,, 

Although Rivera seems to have jumped ship for GcMAF, THIS still appears in relation to Humble and his Genesis II church.  My last foray into this wacky world, about a year ago, the number stood at 163.  So it would appear, though not vocal, Rivera is still considered part of the fold.

Into that mix we have the whole of the AV movement of which Wakefield is a part; a part he fully embraces.


All this got me too thinking in light of the recent Hovind/Tocco video(s) and the current debacle with Wakefield.  (And NO, Wakefield was not exonerated, "To try to argue that a legal ruling such as the one regarding Professor Walker-Smith exonerates Wakefield is an even worse folly than arguing that his being struck off necessarily proves he is a quack. He’s an antivaccine quack based on science; it matters not what the courts say.")  SOCAS hasn't been broached per se, but SOCAS is an issue in the broader context of the AV movement as is the idea of religious freedom in general.  I wonder how much they have learned from the Reich and their throw spaghetti on the wall approach.

You see, some aspects of the alt-med field fall prey to the conspiratorial mind set exemplified by Hovind and the religious batshittery presented by Genesis II.  In fact what scares me is that next on Hovind’s list will be MMS.  He already peddles B-17 as a miracle cancer cure, so MMS would not be to far of a leap.

I guess what is bothersome and why collecting my troubled thoughts so difficult is that I see no end in sight.  I look to people such as Kevin Folta, the SciBabe, Dr David Gorski among many, many others, who have spent years studying this stuff and wonder - what do they really think when a individual such as Hovind or Wakefield (or in Folta’s case Vandana Shiva) make such a mockery out of science.  A field they have spent a lifetime to learn.


In the end I am reminded of what the interesting points John Oliver makes about science and science reporting in the media.

"No! No, no, no, no, no, no, no! In science, you don't just get to cherry pick the parts that justify what you were going to do anyway! That's religion! You're thinking of religion!"

"This is really dangerous! If we start thinking that science is a la carte ... that is what leads people to think that man-made climate change isn't real, or that vaccines cause autism, both of which the scientific consensus is pretty clear on."

Graphics Used: 

http://wp.patheos.com.s3.amazonaws.com/blogs/poptheology/files/2013/08/duck-dynasty.jpg
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/multimedia/archive/00013/wakefield_13866c.jpg
http://www.naturalnews.com/053637_medical_censorship_cancer_narrative_documentaries.html
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=2008360642721846&set=a.1458453434379239.1073741827.100006437884755&type=3&theater
http://genesis2church.is/
http://g2churchvideocourse.g2sacraments.org/member-options-page/?_s2member_vars=ruri..level..0..page..10..Lw%3D%3D&_s2member_sig=1462832148-7e1df19851ad0ca83590ba36fc473461
www.zdravotnickydenik.cz/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Jim-Humble.jpg
http://www.ifyouonlynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/kerri-rivera-pic.jpg
http://i.somethingawful.com/u/garbageday/2013/phriday/vaccines/Zybourne_Clock_02.gif

Show Notes::They are kinda related,,,

Tonight we are going to take a bit of a road trip.   While information gathering for the episodes (part 1 and part 2) concerning Kent Hovind and Mary Tocco, a story began to emerge.  Andrew Wakefield's movie “Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe ” was removed from the Tribeca Film Festival.

Now I am not planning - we all know how that can change - on a another tirade into the anti-vaxx movement (specifically Robert DeNiro or his views).  Wakefield with his fabricated study (thanks to Brian Deer a copy can be found here) along with financial shenanigans have been thoroughly trashed by those better than I.  What is at issue, have Wakefield's First Amendment rights been trampled on?


Brian Deer's available YT video concerning his investigation into Wakefield.
Published on Oct 10, 2014

This is the full version of Brian Deer's November 2004 film on Andrew Wakefield, "MMR: What they didn't tell you."

The award-winning investigation of Wakefield continued for another six years, leading to his erasure as a medical practitioner, and the retraction of research published in the Lancet in 1998 that, upon final scrutiny of the underlying clinical and pathological data, proved to be an elaborate fraud.

"Many people have had articles in the Lancet," Deer commented afterwards. "I've had one out."

It is an issue I was going to address in regards to Phil Robertson and the Duck Dynasty-A&E flap but destiny took me elsewhere.  So today, probably next week, and maybe the week after we will take a look see - were Wakefield's (and Robertson's) rights trampled?

Simple answer is NO.  Simple explanation, neither Tribeca or A&E are considered government agencies.  As we all know, I don't like simple.  Makes for very short diatribes,,,

Of course, the First Amendment only protects against government restriction of artistic expression. It does not apply to the actions of private citizens or businesses.

While government may not shut down an art gallery because it disagrees with the viewpoint reflected in a painting, an art gallery owner can always decline to display a piece of art.

While government may not ban a compact disc because it is offended by the sentiments expressed in a song, a corporation like Wal-Mart can choose not to sell CDs with parental advisory labels.

First though we will have to take in a bit of history.  While it deals with SOCAS, or Separation of Church and State, primarily, there are ramifications in regard to the other part of the First Amendment, that of Free Speech.

This is part of a show that I did while associated with another radio platform.  It was initially geared toward the Pagan community and those that held non-traditional religious views (those that considered their talents a “gift” from god) - which, for all intense purposes, we as atheist also hold; or well, don’t hold.  It was for those that felt themselves "safe" because in their minds they were "Christian enough".  I have revamped it a bit to fit my needs for tonight because the information is valid regardless of religious affiliation.  It is a primer on SOCAS that I tinker with in an effort to make my presentation better.

As I mentioned prior, its relevance will become important in the next couple weeks when I hope to discuss the movie Vaxxed and Andrew Wakefield's expression of persecution and censorship along with the CDC-Thompson debacle. But also it ties into the current election season as well.

SOCAS issues are again (or should I say still) in the spotlight.  As many of you know I follow SOCAS issues pretty close especially concerning the faux "religious liberty" issue in regards to LGBTQI discrimination and the rise of the dominionist/theocratic movement.  As non-believers the implications of SOCAS are quite obvious but what about the so-called liberal or progressive Christians that many within our community like to reach out to?  The interfaith movement,,, How would the issue of SOCAS effect them? It does, and not in a round about fashion, as you may think.

I know many of you have seen some of the more egregious political and religious rhetoric I have posted on my Facebook page and blog from what I call the Reich (doesn't matter really how you label them Moral Majority, Religious Right, Tea Party, GOTP, assholes etc.).  Many pundits, politicians, pulpits AND celebrities have been espousing their rhetoric and a return to what they call the "Biblical/Christian roots" of our Founding Fathers.  The problem is, they have twisted and perverted what the Founders have said, a la David Barton, so that it is hard to know what the original intent was.  (The two Barton books I am most familiar with: The Jefferson Lies: Exposing the Myths You've Always Believed About Thomas Jefferson and The Myth of Separation: What Is the Correct Relationship Between Church and State?)

[See also::   (Re)membering a Christian nation: Christian nationalism, biblical literalism, and the politics of public memory]


I would so like to play this entire clip courtesy of People For the American Way but time constraints will not allow for it.  It is a 7 minute mini documentary entitled "The Religious Right Then and Now" that highlights the Religious Right “near the peak of their power at the 1992 Republican National Convention at the Houston Astrodome. The short film highlights the extreme views of the Religious Right and includes footage of Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush and numerous right-wing activists: Pat Buchanan, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Ralph Reed, Gary Bauer, Phyllis Schlafly, James Robison, etc.”

Now tell me, how have things changed? 

And just so you get the bigger picture, so to speak, a brief timeline (in the show notes) to highlight the idea/fact that this "movement" is a well thought out and continuing plan taking advantage whenever possible. You have heard me speak of it before - the 15% solution.

The formula they've concocted has been called the "15 per cent solution" by the Christian Coalition. Even in a well attended presidential election, only 15 per cent of eligible voters determine the outcome,,, "We don't have to worry about convincing a majority of Americans to agree with us," Guy Rodgers, the Christian Coalition's national field director declared at the 1991 Road to Victory conference. Most of them are staying home and watching Falcon Crest."

"We don't have to worry about convincing a majority of Americans to agree with us," Guy Rodgers, the Christian Coalition's national field director declared at the 1991 Road to Victory conference. Most of them are staying home and watching Falcon Crest."

In 1992, according to People for the American Way, the liberal constitutional watchdog, extremist Christian candidates racked up a 40 per cent win record in state and local races. And, to the horror of Republicans across the nation, they're dominating a number of state wide Republican Party committees.  "What the Christian right spends a lot of time doing," says Marc Wolin, a moderate Republican who ran unsuccessfully for Congress from San Francisco last year, "is going after obscure party posts. They try to control the party apparatus in each county. We have a lot to fear from these people. They want to set up a theocracy in America."

"They have acquired a very detailed and accurate understanding of how political parties are organized," says Craig Berkman, former chairman of the Republican Party in Oregon:

Parties are very susceptible to being taken over by ideologues because lower party offices have no appeal to the vast majority of our citizenry. Many precincts are represented by no one. If you decide all of a sudden because it's your Christian duty to become a precinct representative, you only need a few votes to get elected. Increasingly, they have the key say so on who will be a delegate at the national convention, and who will write the party platform and nominate the presidential candidate,,,

TIMELINE
[This list is by no means exhaustive but highlight incidents that I feel are important to the Reich.  Pay attention primarily to pre-1995, as that is when the ball began to roll.]

1730-40s First "Great Awakening" (George Whitefield, Jonathan Edwards, John Wesley)
1820-40s Second “Great Awakening”
1942 National Association of Evangelicals (NAE)
1st "Modern" Iteration
1960 Coral Ridge Ministry Dr James Kennedy
1961 CBN Launch Pat Robertson
1962 Engel v Vitale (school prayer)
1966 United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB)
1968 Nixon uses the Southern Strategy exploiting racism in the South
1972 Eagle Forum (Phylis Schafly anti-feminism); Free Market Foundation/Liberty Institute
1973 Roe v Wade; Heritage Foundation and American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) - Paul Weyrich; Institutes of Biblical Law - Rousas John Rushdoony
1977 Focus on the Family (James Dobson); American Family Association (Rev. Donald Wildmon)
1979 Moral Majority (Jerry Fallwell); Concerned Women for America (Beverly LaHaye)
2nd "Modern" Iteration
1980  American Coalition for Traditional Values (Timothy LaHaye); Traditional Values Coalition (Rev Louis P. Sheldon); 1981 Schaefer's Christian Manifesto;  Council for National Policy
1983 Family Research Council (James Dobson now Tony Perkins)
1984 School Voucher program first introduced
1986 Operation Rescue now Operation Save America (Randall Terry)
1987 Christian Coalition (Pat Robertson)
1989 Liberty Counsel (Matthew Staver, Liberty University Jerry Fallwell)
1990 American Center for Law and Justice (Pat Robertson); Discovery Institute
1992 Culture War Speech (Pat Buchanan)

This is the first Republican party platform to address sexual preference in some form or another.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iO5_1ps5CAc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pICypNXHKbg

1994 Alliance Defense Fund (Bill Bright Campus Crusade for Christ, Larry Burkett Crown Financial Ministry, James Dobson)
1996 DOMA; Homeschooling included with school voucher program: William Martin’s "With God on Our Side" a companion piece to six-episode PBS documentary of the same name; Fox News launched (founded in 1985)
1997 Pacific Justice Institute
3rd Iteration
1998/99 Wasn't until the Wedge Document that things as we know it today came together
2000 Blackstone Legal Fellowship
2001 911
2004 Born Alive Infants Protection Act
2005 Saddleback Church (Rick Warren) gained national attention; Terry Schiavo case
Manhattan Declaration; Kitzmiller Case
2006 veto of Stem Cell Research by Bush Jr.
2007 National Organization of Marriage NOM (Brian S. Brown PROP 8)
2008 Sarah Palin
The Re-branding 
2009 Rise of the Tea Party Movement
2010 Citizens United v FEC
2012 "War on religion"; Repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell
2014 Hobby Lobby case
2015 Obergefell v. Hodges; Kim Davis Affair

See also:  Wedge Document or Wedge Strategy, Manhattan Declaration, Christian Manifesto

Before we continue, there are two very simplistic points to keep in mind while cruising through this topic.

1] I want y'all to do a bit of a fill-in-the-blank (hypothetically, since I am assuming I am preaching to the choir):  Church/State separation doesn't effect me because I am a  ________ (insert whatever traditional or non-traditional belief system you may practice) 

Now keep that in mind and consider this,,,

2]  Which Bible?  And which form/denomination of Christianity?

There are currently over 41,000 different Christian denominations/organizations worldwide with approximately 1500 different groups within the US    

Altho the exact number of English translations is an unknown, since 1526 when Tyndale's NT began circulating, the number of translation/paraphrases, partial or full, is about 900.  I have actually seen numbers as high 3300+

Do you see where this is leading??

This notion is what drives me bonkers, “they” do not realize that within the dominionists ideology, "they" are not the "right kind of Christian" and read the wrong Bile.  More on that later, maybe,,,  [I am using Ted Cruz as an example as he is the only dominionist left in the presidential race.  Kasich, while still a candidate at the time of this writing is not viable nor is he as hard-core as Cruz.]

Fea maintains that Cruz’s campaign rests on the notion that America was founded as a Christian nation; therefore “restore,” “return to,” and “reclaim” has become Cruz’s special mission. Like his father Rafael, and many culture warriors of the Religious Right, Cruz believes that Christians need to reclaim the various aspects of culture—the media, the entertainment industry, education, government—and take dominion over them.

So what exactly are we talking about here? 

Very simple really, the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which states:  Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The part we are most interested in ATM:  Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,,,  Keep in mind whom this is speaking of,,,CONGRESS!!  Put another way, the government,,, whether it be local, state or federal.

As part of the Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments were ratified on December 15, 1791.   Prior to the enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, the Supreme Court generally held that the protections of the Bill of Rights did not apply to state governments. This is why some in the Reich want the 14th Amendment removed.  It is the basis of many civil liberty cases currently before the courts.  By virtue of the "due process clause" of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, most provisions of the Bill of Rights now also apply to the state and local governments.  This is part of the stink concerning the mRFRA of Indiana along with the idea of taking away rights.  It is a foreseeable after effect of the Hobby Lobby ruling.  See also:  Redefining Religious Liberty: The Covert Campaign Against Civil Rights.

As researcher and activist Jay Michaelson shows in this report, a coalition largely made up of Roman Catholic elites and right-wing evangelicals continues its battle to undermine the promise of the Affordable Care Act by pushing for an even broader realm of religious exemptions in the name of defending religious liberty. Michaelson names the key intellectuals, Religious Right organizations, such as the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, and legal groups, like the Becket Fund, that are working together to advance a discriminatory agenda that would allow employers to put contraception coverage out of reach of their employees.
,,,
To date [March 2013], according to this report, there are 49 pending cases, many represented by the Becket Fund, of companies and nonprofits—including universities—claiming that observing the contraceptive coverage requirement is a violation of their religious liberty.

[N]or shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law (Section1)

It wasn't until Everson v Board of Education (1947) that the "establishment clause" was fully incorporated (made to apply against the states).  It was then that the phrase "separation between church and state" as attributed to Thomas Jefferson became the mainstay central to this issue.

[Just a brief note::  While much of the debate concerning the 14th Amendment ATM centers on “birth right citizenship”, it is generally held by some that the equal protection clause was not intended to prohibit discrimination as currently held by the courts.  I’m not going to get into THAT debate ATM, but bear in mind some want the right to discriminate.  And yes it does go back to the Brown opinion of 1947.]

Numerous court cases have been held throughout our history, as far back as 1879, the Court has always looked at our history as a Republic in deciding such cases.  Justice Hugo Black, in the Everson decision, sums up the whole issue very succinctly:

The "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment means at least this: neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining [p16] or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups, and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect "a wall of separation between church and State." Reynolds v. United States, supra, at 164._

What makes Black’s opinion so powerful, not only does Justice Black rely on Jefferson (letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802):

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State,,,

but also the words of James Madison (Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments), who wrote the First Amendment:

In it, he [referring to Madison] eloquently argued that a true religion did not need the support of law; that no person, either believer or nonbeliever, should be taxed to support a religious institution of any kind; that the best interest of a society required that the minds of men always be wholly free, and that cruel persecutions were the inevitable result of government-established religions.

As you can see this is not a new issue.  It is not some recent atheistic/secular agenda.  It is an issue with a long history in our country.  If you ever have the time you should read Black's opinion, starting around page 8, he gives a wonderful history lesson concerning religious freedoms of our country and the why of our Constitution being the secular document it is.  Contrary to what David Barton and his ilk may have you believe.

Reconstruction is the spark plug behind much of the battle over religion in politics today. The movement’s founder, theologian Rousas John Rushdoony, claimed 20 million followers—a number that includes many who embrace the Reconstruction tenets without having joined any organization. Card-carrying Reconstructionists are few, but their influence is magnified by their leadership in Christian right crusades, from abortion to homeschooling.

Reconstructionists also exert significant clout through front organizations and coalitions with other religious fundamentalists; Baptists, Anglicans, and others have deep theological differences with the movement, but they have made common cause with its leaders in groups such as the National Coalition for Revival. Reconstruction has slowly absorbed, congregation by congregation, the conservative Presbyterian Church in America (not to be confused with the progressive Presbyterian Church [USA]) and has heavily influenced others, notably the Southern Baptists.

The take away for this segment I would like to leave with is this,  there is no gray area where the 1st  Amendment is concerned.  The Founders were quite adamant is regards to SOCAS.  And SOCAS as well as issues of free speech only pertain to the govt.

1] SOCAS is not new
2]  the separation of powers refers to the govt not private individuals or business.  In other words, you can have an opinion, but the 1st and 14th do not protect you from criticism or ramifications
3]  in regards to politics, religious liberty is still a big issue.

So in light of Wakefield crying foul (along with Robertson and Chik-A-Filet drive-through guy), when one looks at the entire 1st Amendment minus the reconstructionist lens, it is fairly pain and simple.

Graphics:

• http://i0.wp.com/disinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Vaxxed-1.jpg?resize=777%2C400
• https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigzINirUNAhOf6zN7pvohNxOSdsteePrvlkGN_aBWoo6DK8ngbOlKux7AyDgczIJaZ8eg2rxDuLg4y9SrYke0LmlI5sSRtYnzgisAl2kodQ9NiC_I3FcBL3CzjHzIRN_DKXnB4Zbbo6y-M/s1600/The+First+Amendment.jpg
• http://xkcd.com/1357/
• https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi6klKqaeTIqnNnscMrLhqNKqQdWKLfVjJtS7kxgm8IjeXkPkl_LWxM3wZItbPiuZ8qWkazwxga4OhR8vGq3Qi7-OBTDQ6YFwru9EUGYaONKIUkczP-ODESVVp-nHn1QBWMFtYDrxA4MY8c/s1600/church_state.jpg
• http://www.thequotepedia.com/images/87/its-not-enough-to-be-a-christian-in-name-only-you-must-live-the-christian-lifestyle-christianity-quote.jpg
•  http://illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/End-of-Religious-Liberty.jpg
• http://www.amazon.com/Jefferson-Lies-Exposing-Always-Believed/dp/1595554599/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8
• http://www.thequotepedia.com/images/05/mark-my-word-if-and-when-these-preachers-get-control-of-the-party-and-theyre-sure-trying-to-do-so-its-going-to-be-terrible-damn-problem.jpg
• http://tell.cla.purdue.edu/JapanProj/FLClipart/Pronouns/you-plural.jpg
• http://www.freedcareahomesearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/first-amendment.jpg
• http://fosterparentsunderattack.com/images/14thamendment.gif
• http://thesoutherneronline.com/frontpage/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/CREATIONISM.jpg

Some stuff on the rise of the Reich

With God on our Side [Video]
God’s Own Party:The Making of the Christian Right

Daniel K. Williams’ briefly reaches back to the 1920s, demonstrating how evangelicals possessed a history of political involvement that manifested itself as G.O.P. partisanship in the late twentieth-century.

What Forster seems to gloss over is the concerted rebranding of the RR around 2000 that began with Bush Jr,

Here is where I have to disagree with Daniel Williams’ groundbreaking new book, God’s Own Party. Williams has collected extensive evidence documenting evangelical activism throughout the last century, upon which I’ve drawn in both parts of this article (along with other sources). But Williams thinks the Religious Right was highly successful; his main thesis is that evangelicals are now essentially in control of the GOP. I agree with David Courtwright that it’s the politicians who have been in the driver’s seat.

Lisa McGirr’s Suburban Warriors: The Origins of the New American Right

Darren Dochuk From Bible Belt to Sun Belt: Plain-Folk Religion, Grassroot Politics, and the Rise of Evangelical Conservatism 

Axel Schäfer Countercultural Conservatives: American Evangelicalism from the Postwar Revival to the New Christian Right 

Moral Minority by David Swartz

28 minute video documenting the birth of the Moral Majority. This video, produced by People for the American Way in 1982, shows actual footage of the politicization of what has become the dominionist movement.

October 11, 2004 video of Joan Bokaer describing the rise of Dominionism in the U.S. government. Joan explains how the Religious Right took over the Republican Party, and how President Bush, along with his Religious Right allies in Congress, are attempting to transform the United States into a Christian nation.

UPDATED::West Virginia House approves religious exemptions bill – LGBTQ Nation

UPDATE::  Child abuse victim advocates concerned about 'religious freedom' bill 

HB 4012,  has been defeated!!  "HRC released the following statement after a bipartisan vote in the West Virginia Senate rejected HB 4012, a shameful anti-LGBT proposal that would put LGBT people -- and West Virginians of all walks of life -- at risk for discrimination. This bill failed to advance this afternoon by a vote of 7-27."

But, knowing how the Reich operates, they will not let this matter go especially as the following article notes in regards to a recent Louisiana court ruling, "which held the sincere practice of a religious belief above the safety and well-being of a child abuse victim."

HB 4012 may be a "dead duck" for now but we will see it again which make the concerns of child abuse even ore pressing.

People who work to prevent child abuse and help abuse victims in West Virginia are concerned that a bill up for a final vote in the Legislature on Wednesday could be used to justify child abuse in the name of “religious freedom.”

The bill (HB 4012), which is similar to “religious freedom restoration acts” in other states, establishes a legal process for courts to follow when people or businesses believe the government is violating their religious beliefs.

The law would establish a balancing test for courts to use when determining whether the person is being substantially burdened by government action, and whether the state has “compelling governmental interest” in ensuring the law is followed.

Governmental actions could include civil rights laws, including local LGBT-inclusive nondiscrimination ordinances, so civil rights advocates fear the law will be used to allow discrimination against the LGBT community and other historically-discriminated against groups.

Proponents of the bill have openly said support stems from opposition to same-sex marriage.

Jim McKay, state coordinator for Prevent Child Abuse West Virginia, is worried about effects on another vulnerable group — children. He wonders if “governmental action” would also include laws to protect children.

__
Amid growing opposition from the business community, West Virginia‘s Republican-led House of Delegates cleared a bill Thursday that proponents say would ensure freedom of religious expression and opponents say would sanction discrimination.

In a 72-26 vote, delegates approved the measure that would let people cite religious objections to state actions in certain court proceedings.

The bill resembles laws in 21 states that are largely modeled off existing federal law. However, newer laws have garnered attention after the Supreme Court ruled to legalize gay marriage.
,,,
On Thursday, more than a dozen Democrats voted with the Republican majority, while a handful of Republicans opposed it.

The proposal moves to the Senate, where Republican Senate President Bill Cole hasn’t taken a position on it.
“That’s going to be a tough one,” Cole told reporters Monday. “There’s no question.”

West Virginia House approves religious exemptions bill – LGBTQ Nation

UPDATE::Aaron And Melissa Klein Head For Big (Money) Leagues With New Attorney - The New Civil Rights Movement

None of this will Aaron or Melissa Klein ever admit to in public, nor, likely, will their new attorneys.

The Kleins have received well over half a million dollars from concerned and supportive conservative Christians outraged that the husband and wife, "good Christians," "lost their business," or so the Kleins claim, and were themselves subjected to harassment.

The Kleins have also started a new business, of sorts: they are now stars on the religious freedom talk circuit, making the rounds to events sponsored by the likes of the Family Research Council and other anti-gay groups.

“The past three years have been devastating,” Melissa Klein says in a press release today from First Liberty, formerly the Liberty Institute. “Just because we couldn’t participate in an event that violated our religious beliefs, we lost our business. We were committed to serving everyone regardless of their circumstances at all other times.”

First Liberty in their press release describes Melissa Klein as the "former owner of Sweet Cakes by Melissa," and to show just how much compassion the young couple deserve, First Liberty proudly has placed a photo of the Kleins in front of their van, their van that says, "Sweet Cakes by Melissa," with a web address: SweetCakesWeb.com. If you click on it you might be confused, because the Kleins, as you can see, are still very much in business.
,,,

The Kleins have apparently dropped their now-former attorney and, like elected officials who want to make big money after doing their stint of public service, have signed on to a top firm. The only difference is instead of a signing with a speakers firm, they've signed with a law firm. First Liberty, headed by the infamous Kelly Shackleford, says it is the "largest legal organization in the nation dedicated exclusively to defending religious freedom."

But just like a speakers' firm, the Kleins have their own page at Fist Liberty, and you can even use it to "Book an interview" with them.

Aaron And Melissa Klein Head For Big (Money) Leagues With New Attorney - The New Civil Rights Movement

UPDATED::BREAKING: Indiana Senate panel kills religious objections proposal – LGBTQ Nation

UPDATE::  So, I am really confused now!  For clarification, SB 344 appears to be the bill that went down in flames ending the gay rights debate in the Indiana General Assembly for the year.

Neither side had been pleased with Senate Bill 344. But Tuesday, religious conservatives claimed a victory while LGBT advocates decried the halt to the debate.

“Rather than further divide Hoosiers and threaten religious freedom, the Indiana Senate wisely chose to put this matter aside and deal with more important and necessary issues,” said Micah Clark, executive director of the American Family Association of Indiana, in a statement.

He touted the death of the legislation as “good news” for religious freedom.

But Freedom Indiana, a group pushing for LGBT rights, framed it as “shameful.”

“We can’t let lawmakers think for one second that this one failed attempt at a short-sighted bill will make this problem, or our movement, magically disappear,” Freedom Indiana campaign manager Chris Paulsen wrote in an email to supporters.

Indiana Competes, a coalition of businesses advocating for LGBT rights legislation, criticized lawmakers for stopping the debate.

"Failure to continue working toward a remedy casts doubt on the sincerity of the Senate’s effort," initiative manager Peter Hanscom said in a statement.

 Why Indiana lawmakers killed the gay rights debate for this year

__
At the time of this writing, it is unclear which bills are being discussed in either article.  Currently, there is SB-100, which according to ThinkProgress,"does add “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to the state’s nondiscrimination laws as it claims to. However, it expends far more words to limit the extent of those protections, making them all but worthless to most plaintiffs."  And SB-66, "[t]he “Super RFRA” undermines critical protections against discrimination. If this bill becomes law, people would be allowed to use religious beliefs as an excuse to harm others. A landlord could claim their religion requires them to deny housing to an unmarried mother. Or a business owner may refuse service to a same-sex couple, citing freedom of religion.

Both bills where being discussed in the Indiana legislature and it appears that one has fallen to defeat:

An Indiana Senate committee has killed a bill that would have thrown out the state’s contentious religious objections law and replaced it with more robust protections for the rights of worship, speech and bearing arms.

State Sen. Mike Young, an Indianapolis Republican, said Wednesday that critics who “demagogue” and “fear monger” had mischaracterized his proposal.

BREAKING: Indiana Senate panel kills religious objections proposal – LGBTQ Nation

While the other may still be in discussion,

A Washington state florist who became a national figure for refusing to provide flowers for a same-sex wedding is scheduled to testify in Indiana against two LGBT rights bills that will be taken up by a state Senate committee.

Barronelle Stutzman, who was at the center of storm over gay rights for refusing the service, will speak Wednesday against the measures before the Indiana Senate Rules Committee. She says people should not be forced to participate in events that conflict with their beliefs.

Indiana legislative proposals: Washington florist to testify against LGBTQ protection bills

See also::  Indiana Senate leader says LGB rights bill to be called for a vote

February 12-13, 2016::End of the day round-up (pg 2)

LGBT Students Have a Right to Know What Schools Discriminate Against Them

While it would take new legislation from Congress to narrow the kinds of carte blanche discrimination (e.g. denying campus housing to transgender students that is consistent with their gender identity) that Title IX’s religious exemption permits, the ACLU has urged the U.S. Department of Education to act where it can. As a bare minimum, LGBT students and their families should have a right to know about the kinds of taxpayer-funded discrimination they can be subjected to by their school.

Last week, the head of the Office for Civil Rights within the Department of Education — in response to a letter from several senators, led by Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) — stated that the department would provide greater transparency about requests for religious exemptions by publishing them online for the public to view for themselves. Up to this point, it has often taken FOIA requests and investigative journalism for this information to come to light.

FL anti-abortion hearing turns racist: ‘White culture’ dies if women are ‘outside the home not having babies’

A Florida state House subcommittee heard testimony on Monday that the “white culture” would be destroyed if white women were “outside the home not having babies” while other ethnicities had a higher birthrate.

During a House Criminal Justice Subcommittee meeting on Monday, lawmakers discussed HB 865, a bill that would ban all abortions except in cases where the health of the mother was at risk.

Republican Rep. Charles Van Zant, who sponsored the bill, argued that life began at conception, and that even zygotes were “citizens of Florida.”

While testifying about the bill, an anti-abortion activist named Paul injected race into the discussion.

“We see the destruction we’re bringing upon ourself as a nation,” Paul opined. “The Muslims, they don’t kill the babies.”

February 26 – Avijit Roy Day Honouring Murdered Atheist Writers in Bangladesh

Please come to this special event in Toronto on Feb. 26th:

February 26th, 2016, marks the passing of one year since the brutal extremist attacks that left Avijit Roy dead and his wife, Rafida Ahmed, seriously injured. CFIC members, friends, and supporters are encouraged to join us as we present the first Avijit Roy Day in honour of murdered atheist writers, publishers, and activists. CFI Canada is proud to work with Mukto Mona (Bangladeshi Freethinking) for this special event. 

Time: 7-9 PM

Venue: Albert Campbell Auditorium (Toronto Public Library)

Address: 496 Birchmount Road, Toronto, ON, M1K 1N8

Bradlee Dean: Gay People Have Never Once Been Victims Of Hate

“Those radicals need to be lawfully dealt with because they are radical, they mean to divide and conquer, they mean to make war against real Christianity.”

“I’ve yet to find a situation where a homosexual could actually verify the fact that they were the victim of someone actually hating on them,” he said. “I have yet to see it.”

Naturopath put breastfeeding mum on water only diet: court

From February to April last year Bodnar, 59, treated the mother, who came to her to help cure her newborn son of eczema.

She allegedly convinced the mother, who cannot be identified, that the only way to help the baby was to adopt a diet of raw vegetables, fruit and seeds.

The court heard the mother was "intimidated by the accused" and made to feel guilty for using steroid creams to treat the eczema "as it was best to use nothing to allow the skin to breathe".

Bodnar allegedly told the mother "Are you 100 per cent raw? You have to be 100 per cent raw if you want to see your son heal."

Police allege that when the baby developed a fever Bodnar told the mother to adopt a water only diet, telling her that her baby would not get better if she ate.

When the child was six months old his mother asked Bodnar if she could feed him vegetable puree but the naturopath allegedly advised her to put raw food in a net and let the infant suck it.

Bodnar is also accused of telling the mother to feed the child goat milk.

City Officials: Evansville property owner possibly blurs the line of free speech

"I personally had not received any complaints on that property, and after I went and looked at it, I was a little surprised that I hadn't."

According to the assessor's office, the property has been owned by Michael J. Williams for 10 years.

We knocked on his door twice today, but no one answered.

But plenty of surveillance camera systems equipped with microphones, were watching us.

" I personally wouldn't like it, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's illegal."

Building Commissioner Ron Beane says the city's legal team is examining this case closely.

Do these phrases violate city ordinances to property maintenance, or is this the owner's right to use his house as a canvas for social issues?

"I think it might be offensive to some people but I think it might be a freedom of speech. We're used to it, we've laughed about it and made comments about it," explains a woman who lives nearby.

You mustn’t ‘engage in sodomy with the sewage system of another’s anatomy’

Staunchly right-wing pundit Larry Tomczak recently unveiled a little challenge he presented to himself: The “30 Day Bullseye Challenge,” to be exact.

The project consists of producing 30 short, blippy videos that demonstrate the proper etiquette and desired worldview of a practicing Christian.

The series touches upon all the hot-button issues one might expect, particularly homosexuality, which Tomczak suggests leads to a lifetime of disease and abject misery should one venture down that shadowy left-hand path:

“With all the hoopla about this one and that one, hey, they’re coming out and it being a time to celebrate gay marriage and gay lifestyles as normal, natural, beautiful. People need to awaken … to the reality that this so-called love story doesn’t have a happy ending.”

Senator seeks protections for same-sex marriage objectors

A Georgia lawmaker says religious adoption agencies, schools and other nonprofits should be able to refuse service to same-sex couples; months after the U.S. Supreme Court effectively legalized gay marriage nationwide.
,,,
Gay rights and civil rights organizations already have bashed the proposal, calling it anti-LGBT and broader than a federal version. Those groups warn Kirk’s bill would let religious nonprofits or organizations deny same-sex couples even if receiving taxpayer money.

Stories I didn't get too from January 2016

These are in no particular order, nor are they vetted in any way.  In other words they could be satire and I am unawares,,,

Obama just found out about the tampon tax, and he is not a fan

President Obama is a proponent for equality in the healthcare system, but up until Friday, he knew nothing about the luxury taxes that 40 states place on sanitary pads and tampons.

The Brutalism of Ted Cruz

Eventually, the mistake came to light and Haley tried to fix it. Ted Cruz was solicitor general of Texas at the time. Instead of just letting Haley go for time served, Cruz took the case to the Supreme Court to keep Haley in prison for the full 16 years.

NYT's 'Conservative' Brooks Rips Cruz's 'Pagan Brutalism.' Here's The REAL Reason He Hates Cruz

David Brooks’ all-out assault on Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) has reached unforeseen heights today with a column in which he labels Cruz “brutal” and un-Christian for his harsh rhetoric against the left. Here’s Brooks’ reprehensible, religiously bigoted attack,,,

How the Conservative Media Went Nuts When David Brooks and I Discussed Cruz's "Satanic" Tone

I don't know about Brooks, but I was besieged on Twitter by conservatives who hurled angry how-dare-you tweets at me. Some accused me of committing a hate crime (the victims: Christians). But this was yet another exercise of false right-wing outrage, and a demonstration of rather poor reading comprehension on the right.

Ted Cruz’s Faith Is Under Fire. Here’s The Story Behind His Religious Beliefs

When Texas Sen. Ted Cruz took the stage at Liberty University last March to launch his bid for the White House, both the location of his announcement and the first words of his campaign made his election strategy clear: he wants conservative religious votes.

Congressman Readies Ted Cruz Eligibility Lawsuit With Eye on Mom

Billionaire businessman Donald Trump suggested this week his nearest rival for the Republican presidential nomination may be ineligible for office and won a daylong echo across the political press, despite Texas Sen. Ted Cruz’s attempt to brush off the commentary.

'Birther' Orly Taitz: Ted Cruz Has 'Basically the Same Issue as Obama'

"Clearly there is an issue of eligibility," crusading skeptic of President Barack Obama's birth certificate Orly Taitz told U.S. News. "It's basically the same issue as Obama has."

Proof that Ted Cruz did not become a US citizen at birth

According to the Canadian Citizenship Act of 1946, also referred to as the "Act of 1947" because of its effective date, Canada did not allow dual citizenship. This was the first citizenship act in Canada to create a new citizenship status separate from being considered British Subjects. With the pride of a nation first enacting the right to become Canadian Citizens, it would stand to reason why they also chose at the time to not allow dual citizenship. According to the Government of Canada's website, the heading "History of citizenship legislation" states the following,,,

Liberty and SOGI Laws: An Impossible and Unsustainable "Compromise"

Big Business and Big Law are using Big Government to impose their cultural values on small businesses and ordinary Americans. Indiana does not need to create new laws on sexual orientation or gender identity for people who identify as sexual minorities to be treated justly. The best way to protect all Hoosiers is for Indiana not to adopt a SOGI policy at all.

BarbWire: Leftists Are Using Our Former Columnist Ted Shoebat To Unfairly Smear All Christians

Infamous Brazilian anti-gay activist Julio Severo today published a BarbWire column [http://www.donotlink.com/i436] which denounces the leftists at Right Wing Watch for reporting on former BarbWire columnist Ted Shoebat’s incessant calls to execute all homosexuals. It’s so unfair! It not like Shoebat appears in a recent anti-LGBT documentary alongside leading evangelicals and GOP presidential candidates. Oh, wait. He writes,,,

Theodore Shoebat Wants Blasphemers Burned At The Stake To Prevent Cannibalism

"That stuff cannot be tolerated," he explained, "because as soon as you allow attacks on Christianity to be enabled and to thrive, then the Christian spirit begins to decay, it begins to decline and all sorts of moral evils take place like public acts of sodomy, public acts of desecration and degenerate behavior and murder. It just spirals and it goes on and on and pretty soon you have cannibalism, pretty soon you have bestiality and pedophilia."

Theodore Shoebat Says That Gays Routinely Rape And Murder Young Boys During 'Southern Decadence'

As Shoebat explained, a fellow anti-gay activist "went out to preach against the sodomites in New Orleans" and was told by locals "about how the sodomites in the French Quarter go out and hunt for little boys, they steal little boys and then bring them to the gay bars and they rape them and they murder them in the bars."

Shoebat says that he asked for evidence of this but was told by his friend that this was simply what he had heard from the locals, so Shoebat did his own investigation and claimed to have discovered that there are thousands of reports of young boys being routinely raped by gay men while the police in New Orleans simply look the other way.

When Exemption is the Rule: The Religious Freedom Strategy of the Christian Right

The evangelical Protestant Christian Right and U.S. Roman Catholic bishops are intensifying their campaign to carve out arenas of public life where religious institutions, individuals, and even businesses may evade civil rights and labor laws in the name of religious liberty. By creating zones of legal exemption, the Christian Right seeks to shrink the public sphere and the arenas within which the government has legitimacy to defend people’s rights, including reproductive, labor, and LGBTQ rights. In this, it is often aligned with the antigovernment strategy of free market libertarians and some business interests, who for a variety of reasons also seek to restrict arenas where government can legally act.

This conservative Christian alliance is challenging a century or more of social advances and many of the premises of the Enlightenment underlying the very definition of religious liberty in the United States. Its long-range goal is to impose a conservative Christian social order inspired by religious law, in part by eroding pillars of undergirding religious pluralism that are integral to our constitutional democracy.

Since Political Research Associates’ March 2013 report, Redefining Religious Liberty: The Covert Campaign Against Civil Rights,^* a remarkable string of cultural, legislative, and legal victories by the LGBTQ community have further animated the Right’s defensive strategy aimed at exempting conservative Christians from having to accept certain advances in human and civil rights. However, the Christian Right’s religious freedom strategy is part of its long-game and is not merely an anti-LGBTQ tactic.

What the Koch brothers don't want you to know about the family money

Maybe this is what's behind the Koch brothers' mission to destroy the U.S. government as we know it—the government started it way back in 1944 when U.S. bombers destroyed an oil refinery built by their father, Fred Koch, in Nazi Germany. Yes, Koch money came in part from Nazi Germany, and that's not all. All of this is detailed in a new book from investigative reporter Jane Mayer, and examined more deeply by Gawker,,,

Concentration Camp Inmates Had To Rebuild A Nazi Refinery The Koch Brothers' Dad Helped Construct

Bombshell Reveals Nazi Connection To the Koch Brothers

Indiana Republicans Introduce The Most Anti-LGBT LGBT Rights Bill Ever | ThinkProgress

After last spring’s disastrous “religious liberty” legislation and months of chatter, Indiana Republicans have cooked up some new legislation to protect LGBT people from discrimination. Unfortunately, a draft of the new bill reveals that it is designed to accomplish the complete opposite.

The bill, which will be known as Senate Bill 100, does add “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to the state’s nondiscrimination laws as it claims to. However, it expends far more words to limit the extent of those protections, making them all but worthless to most plaintiffs.

,,,
In other words, Indiana Republicans are proposing legislation that creates nondiscrimination for LGBT people that is as weighted as much against those LGBT people exercising their protections as possible. Lambda Legal decried the bill as a “wolf in sheep’s clothing,” noting, “This doesn’t protect LGBT people — it is a road map for discrimination against LGBT people.”

Indiana Republicans Introduce The Most Anti-LGBT LGBT Rights Bill Ever | ThinkProgress

Ted Cruz And Ben Carson Appear In Film Promoting A Radically Anti-Gay Pastor And Slavery Defender | Right Wing Watch

Pastor Douglas Wilson is a radically right-wing pastor from Idaho who defends slavery, calls for gays to be exiled and adulterers to be put to death. In 2012, he was invited to speak at Indiana University, which led to protests and confrontation and now, a right-wing documentary about the controversy called "The Free Speech Apocalypse."
Directed by Darren Doane, perhaps best known for directing Kirk Cameron's "Saving Christmas," which is literally one of the worst films ever made, the new movie presents Wilson's experience of going up against the left-wing "tolerance buzzsaw" and, amazingly, features appearances by Ted Cruz and Ben Carson:

The Free Speech Apocalypse exposes the strategies of the anti-God, anti-traditional, hyper-liberal elite and offers perspective on the cultural decay that has accelerated across the country over the three years since Wilson's visit to Indiana University.

Worst yet, The Free Speech Apocalypse demonstrates clearly the erosion of free speech and religious liberty in America. The right to hold your own opinions if they differ from leftist agendas is vanishing at an alarming rate, and it's time for ordinary Americans to wake up and speak out.

This documentary features (among others) Sweet Cakes owners Aaron and Melissa Klein, as well as presidential candidates Ted Cruz and Dr. Ben Carson outlining the concerns they have that unelected judges are ruling against the common citizen's Constitutional right to free speech.

A trailer posted on the film's website prominently features both Cruz and Carson.
,,,
Earlier this year, Rand Paul, Mike Huckabee and various Republican members of Congress appeared in another right-wing anti-gay documentary alongside a Religious Right activist who openly calls for gays and all those how refuse to submit to Christianity to be put to death.

Are GOP presidential hopefuls utterly incapable of doing any research or vetting before agreeing to appear in these sorts of films?

Ted Cruz And Ben Carson Appear In Film Promoting A Radically Anti-Gay Pastor And Slavery Defender | Right Wing Watch

ADDENDUM::Bakers Who Were Fined $135,000 for Refusing to Make Gay Wedding Cake Explain Why They’re Continuing to Defy the Order | TheBlaze.com

Melissa Klein, owner of the embattled Sweetcakes by Melissa bakery, explained on Monday why she and her husband, Aaron, continue to ignore a $135,000 judgement imposed over their refusal to make a lesbian wedding cake, saying that they don’t want to set a bad precedent.

“We feel like we shouldn’t have to pay when we haven’t even gotten due process,” Klein told TheBlaze. “We also feel like we’re taking a stand for the next person … that this could happen to. We don’t want to set a precedent.”
She continued, “We want to fight this, and we want to fight this all the way.”

Her comments were in response to Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries spokesman Charlie Burr, who recently told the Daily Signal that the agency is “exploring collection options,” which could set the stage for the government to go after the Kleins’ home and assets.

Bakers Who Were Fined $135,000 for Refusing to Make Gay Wedding Cake Explain Why They’re Continuing to Defy the Order | TheBlaze.com

See also:  Officials Move to Take Christian Bakers’ Home After Couple Refuses to Pay $135,000 to Lesbians

UPDATE:: State Takes Legal Action to Seize $135K From Oregon Bakers

The agency that ordered Aaron and Melissa Klein to pay $135,000 in damages for refusing to bake a cake for a same-sex couple began the legal process last week to seize the money the Oregon bakers are refusing to pay.

“Our agency has docketed the judgment and is exploring collection options,” Charlie Burr, communications director for the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, told The Daily Signal. “They are entitled to a full and fair review of the case, but do not have the right to disregard a legally binding order.”

Docketing the judgment is a preliminary step the agency must take in order to seize the Kleins’ house, property, or other assets in lieu of payment.
,,,
“There’s legal reasons and there’s also kind of personal reasons,” Aaron Klein told The Daily Signal in a phone interview. “If a civil court or a circuit court judge had made this order, I would consider it legally binding. But when a bureaucracy does it and I didn’t get due process, I don’t call it legally binding.”

State Takes Legal Action to Seize $135K From Oregon Bakers

ADDENDUM::Tampon-waving woman demands officials protect her right to speak in tongues amid anti-gay rant

In regards to the troublesome equal rights law proposed by Anchorage Assembly member  Bill Evans:

Evans said that he borrowed the religious conscience provision from elsewhere, and that may refer to the recent nondiscrimination protections passed in Utah. The Utah compromise, however, was unique because religious exemptions already existed under state law, for other civil rights protections. Thus, the carveouts were not unique to LGBT people, but were the same as they were for race, sex, and other classes.

In this proposal, Evans is actually doing the opposite in quite a problematic way. He’s trying to create new exemptions specifically to accommodate the addition of LGBT protections. Moreover, he’s not even qualifying them as LGBT-specific, so all of Anchorage’s civil rights protections would be weakened as a result. Refusing to serve an interracial marriage would hypothetically be just as shielded as refusing to serve a same-sex marriage.

We now have this bit of wackiness,

A failed U.S. Senate candidate known for speaking in tongues spoke out against LGBT rights in a wacky, tampon-waving address to city officials in Anchorage.

Kathleen Tonn, [mentioned here] the former Republican candidate, carried a briefcase stuffed with props and wore a wool hat and flannel sweatshirt Tuesday night to the meeting of the Anchorage assembly, which is considering an LGBT rights ordinance, reported the Joe My God blog.

“Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. You like my trumpet? It’s a sound heard around the world,” Tonn said, before pulling a Bible from her briefcase.
,,,
“Since one of my brethren introduced the King James Bible, since I represent the Lord Jesus Christ the great I am, I’m going to add to your public document and your public record from the public document of the great I am,” Tonn told baffled officials.

“Starting with, oh my — a tampon,” she said, pulling a feminine hygiene product from between the pages of her Bible. “Reminds me that little girls in pubescence get periods — female girls.”

Tonn, who is probably best known for a video she posted online showing herself fully clothed and speaking in tongues in a sauna, then angrily read a lengthy passage from the Second Epistle of Peter describing God’s wrathful judgment against Sodom and Gomorrah.

WATCH: Tampon-waving woman demands officials protect her right to speak in tongues amid anti-gay rant

Here's Everything You Need To Know About The Next Big Fight For LGBT Rights - Towleroad

With marriage equality out of the way (minus a few exceptions), it’s no secret that religious exemption laws represent one of the next major battlegrounds in the struggle for LGBT equality.

Which means that if you haven’t already, this might be a good time to bone up on which states have these laws, how they work and why they pose such a grave threat to gay rights going forward.

The Movement Advancement Project (MAP) released a report today that serves as a good primer on the subject, and as you can see in the map reproduced above, the news is not so good.

The report shows that nearly half of LGBT Americans live in one of 21 states with broad religious exemption laws, and with new proposals likely this fall, those numbers may soon grow. Already, lawmakers in 17 states have introduced religious exemption proposals since the beginning of the year, largely in response to the spread of marriage equality.

Here's Everything You Need To Know About The Next Big Fight For LGBT Rights - Towleroad

ADDENDUM::What is so sad, pathetic really, is this scenario is being played out again,,,

in the Kim Davis affair.  Like the Kleins - who are being represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom - it is all being orchestrated by piss poor legal advice from Liberty Counsel.

Constantly jockeying for position and prominence with the similarly missioned Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), Liberty Counsel is technically a non-profit organization providing pro bono legal representation for “religious freedom, the sanctity of life, and the family.” Liberty and ADF seek out opportunities to represent conservative Christians in potentially high-profile religious liberties cases. This accomplishes two necessary tasks: keeping their organizations in the news, and for Liberty Counsel, it ensures yearly donations and grants exceeding $4 million will continue to flow in.

Both organizations are guilty of promoting markedly flawed accounts of "persecuted" Christians who are most often simply people who discriminate and break the law using their beliefs to validate the wrongdoing. The entire charade garners the attention, sympathy, and financial support of conservative segments of the population who rarely dig into the details and seem so easily manipulated by a narrative in alignment with their fears.

Staver's counsel to Davis has simply been bad advice; there was no way her religious beliefs about the exclusivity of marriage as between a man and a woman would absolve her of the duties of her elected office. But, even bad advice successfully keeps religious liberties in news and subsequently, the cash coming in.
,,,
The federal court ruling was not enough to stop or satisfy Liberty Counsel from pressing the issue further. Staver filed an appeal to the 6th Circuit Court on Friday asking for "asylum for her (Davis') conscience." The Supreme Court waited until late Monday to deny her request.

It is something I have been saying for months in regards to, not just Liberty Counsel, but Alliance Defending Freedom and Pacific Justice Institute. All these "religious liberty" cases are cash cows, but they hiding a very dangerous agenda, "While participants hail from various denominations, they all commit to using their legal careers to 'reorder society' according to a 'christendomic' worldview, in which there is no separation between church and state." It became blatantly obvious with the formation of the Blackstone Legal Fellowship, as well as the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty
 
It is a point the Slate's, Mark Joseph Stem also makes,

It would be easy to write a story mocking the application’s histrionics and thinly veiled animus. But quite frankly, I’m growing a bit concerned about Davis’ lawyers. Davis is being represented by the Liberty Counsel, a far-right fringe group that specializes in anti-gay litigation. (Naturally, it is also a Christian ministry and a tax-exempt nonprofit.) Founder and Chairman Mathew D. Staver has used Davis’ case to raise money and boost publicity for his group, going so far as to hold a rally for Davis,,,

Law firms regularly use sexy cases to increase their own profiles, and it’s perfectly fine to bandy about your client to further a constitutional cause. (Gay rights litigators do it all the time.) But Staver is taking things too far. The first sign of trouble arose early in the case: When a federal judge ordered Davis to issue licenses or be held in contempt of court, the Liberty Counsel advised her to disobey the ruling. Good lawyers don’t usually tell their clients to defy lawful court orders, especially when jail time is a real possibility. Yet the Liberty Counsel didn’t mind putting their client at risk—perhaps because the idea of a middle-aged woman being hauled off to jail for purportedly following her conscience would send thousands of anti-gay Americans reaching for their pitchforks (and checkbooks).

The only thing missing from Baldock's and Stem's observations, it's exactly what the Reich wants:

1) Find inflammatory wedge issues and scapegoats to divide people and force them to choose sides
2) Persuade people to join your righteous “team” in its effort to purify society. Demand absolute loyalty and obedience to that team’s leaders (even above allegiance to the state
,,,
5) Build an insular media cocoon to disseminate propaganda. This vast echo chamber is contemptuous of contradictory facts, suspicious of reason, and impervious to mainstream media scrutiny
,,,
9) Constantly agitate and manufacture havoc, because theocracy can only be attained amid chaos. Without a functioning central government, the shadow infrastructure created by fundamentalists makes them the best situated to fill a vacuum, restore order at the price of liberty, and install their regime

Although I don't think we have quite reached the point of #9, if one reads Franklin Grahams (cited above), that is exactly what he is trying to foment.

“I’m thankful and proud that Americans are standing up against the evil being forced on us. Our religious rights and freedoms are being trampled on,,,.  We need more Americans who are willing to take a stand for religious freedoms and biblical values in our communities. If we don’t, we won’t even recognize the America that our children and our grandchildren will be left with. Pray for Kim Davis and for our nation today.”

As Benjimen Corey notes,

First, evil is not being forced upon Kim Davis. It is her religious belief that same sex marriage is wrong, and she’s entitled to that belief. No one is forcing her to divorce her 4th husband and marry a woman– that would be an obvious violation of her religious liberty. But doing her job as a clerk of the court? This has nothing to do with religious liberty.

,,,

This particular case however, isn’t about Ms. Davis being free to practice her religion and it isn’t about having the freedom to conform into the image and likeness of Christ. Instead, this is about Ms. Davis’s attempt to force her religious restrictions on the general public and an attempt to conform the secular government into the image and likeness of Christ (or her version thereof). 

And this is why she and Franklin are wrong, even if their theology were somehow proven to be right. Nowhere in the New Testament does it tell us we are to take control of government and shape it to look like Jesus. Jesus never advocates taking political power, or using the power of government to build the Kingdom of God. Never.

,,,

Ms. Davis has essentially hijacked a portion of the government and is now using that arm of government– not in an attempt to live out her religious convictions– but to force those convictions on other people. If a person from any other religious tradition were to do this, Franklin Graham would be pitching a fit.  [My emphasis]