Shepard Smith: more than a liberal token

Shepard Smith of Fox News said that the "same crowd that says, "We don't want Sharia law" is the same crowd that support Kim Davis in her refusal to sign off as a Kentucky County Clerk on gay marriage licenses.

So if Smith got his way, we would have people who follow Sharia law in total, killing gay couples for its violation of Sharia law. And to do it "by the [Sharia] book," gay couples would be tossed off of high buildings, some stoned or hanged, but all would be dead in any case.

Isn't it suckworthy how Fox News is moving more and more to the left with people like Shepard Smith, Richard Fowler, Alan Colmes and Geraldo Rivera?

How disgusting is it that Shepard Smith blames the woes of America on right-wing crazies?  He even cut into his press conference that covered Davis' release from prison to verbally attack her and her supporters.  

"They set this up as a religious play again," Smith said. "This is the same crowd that says 'We don't want Sharia law,' don't let them tell us what to do, keep their religion out of our lives and out of our government.' Well, here we go again."

I don't agree that Kim Davis should be jailed for what she refused to do based upon her religious convictions, but I also see this as a very similar situation when a woman in a hijab refuses to remove it if her job requires that. There is no easy answer.

Or is there?

Perhaps job descriptions need to be amended and carefully worded to include a statement the prospective employee must agree to before being hired. 

For instance, a cab company may not want to allow women in burqas to drive because their peripheral vision is compromised in the cloth coffin they must wear. Luckily for women in burqas, they are often not allowed out of their homes without a male guardian, so driving a cab is irrelevant to them, but you see my point.

A woman who agrees to a modeling job must agree not to wear a hijab as part of the ensemble. 

A male cabbie must agree to take passengers, even if they are Jewish, or even if they are carrying alcohol in a closed bottle. An employment agreement would need to take that into consideration when hiring a Muslim.

If companies don't want to allow Muslims to pray during working hours, that needs to be stipulated, and Islam has actually made allowances for this, but will not tell us infidels.

I don't agree with Kim Davis because I see the situation from a wider perspective. I also agree that Christians are being persecuted like crazy in the USA, and mostly by people like Shepard Smith and the left. 

I believe a person with their own business has the right to refuse participating in, say, baking a wedding cake, or being a photographer in a same-sex wedding, but doesn't have the right to refuse a gay person as a regular customer. It's the ceremony that goes against the religious ideology, not the human being.

Kim Davis signing off on a same-sex marriage license should not equate with going against her beliefs anymore than signing off on a heterosexual license for a couple you think should not get married, for whatever reason you may have to believe that.

But ask yourself this: if a gay couple wanted to get married and went to a Muslim bake shop and were refused service, what would a liberal do?



Tweet

Pushing Back at the Bullies

I recently blogged about Brendan Eich, former CEO of Mozilla, who was forced to resign his position after only ten days on the job, (Gay Rights Bullies, 4/5/2014) I didn't  get a ton of comments, but the one I received was illuminating. Eich had donated $1000 to support California's Proposition 8, and bill that opposed same-sex marriage. The left called for his resignation and a web-based dating service, OKCupid refused to allow Firefo, the Mozilla browser they own, to be used on their site.

Now I admit that the left has a silver tongue (albeit forked) when it comes to framing an issue the way they see fit. They call those who support the bill "anti-gay rights," as opposed to "anti same-sex marriage," and refuse to see this as a moral issue for some and a religious issue as well. Of course, these are the same left wing bullies who are adamant about removing all religious symbols from public display, and I suspect that it's just going to be a matter of time when that will include crosses on church steeples, and the Star of David on synagogues. I don't believe it's going to adversely effect the Muslim community--I bet they'll be able to continue having their crescent moon religious symbol above their mosques along with hijabs and the like. Interestingly, Islamists coined the PC word "Islamophobic" in the same manner the left coins their terms, and both Islamists and the left like to throw around the term "racist" when Islam has nothing to do with race, and the GOP had nothing to do with the KKK.

But I digress.

The person who commented on my post asked why did I believe that un-installing a web browser equated to bullying. He seems to have intentionally missed the point. It has nothing to do with un-installing a browser--that would make the argument weak--it has to do with intimidating people to the point where they resign from their job. That's what they did to Eich.

On one hand, when you disagree with the policies or even the political views of a corporation or smaller company, you have every right to boycott them. Nobody should be able to bully you into using their services or products. There should not be any retribution.

On the other hand, if you agree with a policy or political view, you have every right to support it without having to fear retribution. The left, however, doesn't see it that way. Their attitude is, "It's my way or the highway," and if you don't fall in line, you're sunk.

Yeah, Islam, get over it

The fact is, even if you do fall in line, the fight never seems to end. The left really doesn't care as much as it pretends to about gay rights (except for those that are gay leftists) or even about racism. If they did, they wouldn't give a "free pass" to people on the left who make racist comments, or homophobic statements. Joe Biden would have been figuratively crucified for having made that slur about Indians with their accents, working in fast-food places. Or LBJ's comment about getting "the niggers to vote Democratic for the next 200 years." (This is paraphrased but quite similar to the actual words.) They don't really care for blacks and other people of color because their programs have held them back since the Civil War.

But the left has a silver tongue. They use terms like "anti-gay rights," (for same-sex marriage)  or "obligation," (for taxes), and even say that they have "freedom from religion," (there's even an active, vigorously litigating organization by that title) when, in fact, the Constitution speaks about "Freedom of Religion." 

It's time for conservatives to be vigorously active in how we respond to liberals. We actually have a lot more clout than you may believe. If you agree, then do something about it.

In my latest novel, a New York reporter is taken hostage by terrorists. If POTUS refuses to release 3 Gitmo jihadists, the reporter will die in 24 hours—they will behead him and show it on the Internet. There is only one way out but the clock is ticking . . .

Jihad Joe: a Novel  Create Space soft cover book edition

Jihad Joe see it here ebook version

Tweet