Monday, December 07, 2009

ACLU, Court Take Away Christian's Daughter, Give To Lesbo Ex-Pal

Note to lazy-minded "progressives": I'm just standing up for the rights of a vulnerable, frequently-and-increasingly-persecuted minority, and you'll probably think horrible things of me because of it, but I don't care, because doing the right thing is more important than being popular.

Again the Hard Left demonstrates its alarming, frightening hatred and contempt for Christians and Christianity, as they'd never do for, say, Islam, nor for homosexuality.

(Emphasis mine)

Ah. Even "civil unions" for homosexuals is already causing Christians in particular to suffer, to lose their rights, to lose their children.

The Christian mother is being punished by the Hard Left in retaliation for daringly having renounced the homosexual lifestyle for Christianity.

Even "civil unions" for homosexuals are actually hurting others! Yes! It's proven! It DOES hurt others! So therefore would homosexual "marriage"!

The homosexuals are being elevated above, being made superior to, being given superior rights, compared to the Christians and the Ex-Gays.

Just because of the way they like to play with their bodies with someone else! Oops! Did I say something I shouldn't have? Ah, so what? The homosexuals say nasty things about Christians, as the lesbian in this case did:
Jenkins has stated she believes it is not good for a child to be raised in a Christian atmosphere.
So, you see, this hateful, Christianophobic lesbian hates Christians and is obviously hateful towards Christianity, saying that Christianity is bad for children. What an intolerant, hateful bigot! How dare she? How'd she like it if a Christian said that lesbians shouldn't be allowed to raise children because the homosexual atmosphere is not a good atmosphere for children?

Not to mention that, since they're on the lesbian supremacist's side, the ACLU is also anti-Christian and doesn't care about children, either. Those folks just want to advance homosexuality, mindless of the rights of others and the welfare of children and of society and human civilization's future viability.

Besides, the mother refused to let the lesbian see the girl because, amongst other things, she suspected that the lesbian might be a pedophile and might potentially molest her daughter, due to the unusual, shocking behavior of the lesbian, as indicated by the child herself:

Miller had refused because of issues over previous visits, including statements by Isabella that she was compelled to bathe naked with Jenkins.
The little girl was compelled to bathe naked with an adult.

Oh, but what's the harm in that, Leftists would ask. How dare we be alarmed by a homosexual adult forcing a child to get into the tub naked with her? Oh, how hateful and ignorant! Call the "Human Rights" Commission!

The dispute is over Jenkins' demands for visitation and/or custody of Isabella, with whom she has neither a blood nor an adoptive relationship.

It's also apparent that the lesbian doesn't care for the girl at all (and apparently only cares about herself):
Liberty Counsel said, "Unrefuted testimony has shown that for the last five years, Janet has neither attempted to phone nor write Isabella. She has never sent Isabella a card of any kind for any occasion. Janet has refused to attend Isabella's Christmas plays because she does not want to be around a Christian environment. She has also said that it is not in Isabella's best interest to be raised in a Christian home."
Christianophobia. Ignorance. Bigotry. Hatred. Intolerance. Contempt. Refusal to respect the rights of others. What a monster! I don't care if she likes to do the lickety-split with other women, really; that doesn't matter to me. What matters is that the lesbian is a disgustingly hateful individual who doesn't deserve what the court is giving her and who would most likely definitely bring the child up to be a hateful bigot herself. Can't have that!

What, after all, would homosexual militants say if a Christian said they didn't want to be around a homosexual environment? They'd at least accuse them of "homophobia".

Clearly, the lesbian is selfish and hateful, as well as clearly risky vis-a-vis pedophilian sexual abuse. She therefore can only be logically, rationally, SAFELY deemed to be likely harmful to the little girl.

Best to err on the side of childens' safety than to err on the side of political correctness fascsim and homosexuals' feelings (hey, they don't care about Christians' feelings, so why should we give a big pile of poop about the other folks' feelings?).

And the court is clearly ruling wrongly, having ignored the facts and ignored the need for the girl to have her best interests taken into account, not the desires of selfish sexual extremists and political correctness fascism!

Finally, I take no lessons from lazy-minded "progressives" automatically, without even a split second's aforethought, waxing politically correct. I know what they'd say about me for this post. They'd ignore the hatefulness, selfishness, intolerance and apparent possible pedophilian orientation of the homosexual woman in this case and call me hateful for daring to be critical based on the facts of the case.

The childrens' interests are more important than the homosexuals' precious feelings and desires. Who dares to say otherwise? Who wants to say that the sexual preference of adults is more important than the welfare of children?

It's hard to feel comfortable with militant, political homosexual extremism and revolutionary hellbentness, when we see this sort of thing happening!