We see this here…the liberal left shouting down anyone who dares voice an opinion against what they think.
We saw it with the boycott organised against Willie and JT…the left always go for your money…they have tried the same with me several times.
Check out the comments at The Daily blog or the Standard recently when discussing me or David Farrar and you will see death wishes upon us, ranting that we should be silenced and so forth.
The liberal left are not fans of free speech and now their terror tactics are starting to bite.
[N]ot only Christians, but also Muslims and Jews, increasingly feel they are no longer free to express any belief, no matter how deeply felt, that runs counter to the prevailing fashions for superficial ‚Äútolerance‚ÄĚ and ‚Äúequality‚ÄĚ (terms which no longer bear their dictionary meaning but are part of a political jargon in which only certain views, and certain groups, count as legitimate).
Only 50 years ago, liberals supported ‚Äúalternative culture‚ÄĚ; they manned the barricades in protest against the establishment position on war, race and feminism. Today, liberals abhor any alternative to their credo. No one should offer an opinion that runs against the grain on issues that liberals consider ‚Äúset in stone‚ÄĚ, such as sexuality or the sanctity of life.
Intolerance is no longer the prerogative of overt racists and other bigots ‚Äď it is state-sanctioned. It is no longer the case that the authorities are impartial on matters of belief, and will intervene to protect the interests and heritage of the weak. When it comes to crushing the rights of those who dissent from the new orthodoxy, politicians and bureaucrats alike are in the forefront of the attacks, not the defence.
I believe that religious liberty is mean¬≠ingless if religious subcultures do not have the right to practise and preach according to their beliefs. These views ‚Äď for example, on abortion, adoption, divorce, marriage, promiscuity and euthanasia ‚Äď may be unfashionable. They certainly will strike many liberal-minded outsiders as harsh, impractical, outmoded, and irrelevant.
But that is not the point. Adherents of these beliefs should not face life-ruining disadvantages. They should not have to close their businesses, as happened to the Christian couple who said only married heterosexual couples could stay at their bed and breakfast. They should not lose their jobs, which was the case of the registrar who refused to marry gays. When Britain was fighting for its life in the Second World War, it never forced pacifists to bear arms. So why force the closure of a Catholic adoption agency that for almost 150 years has placed some of society‚Äôs most vulnerable children with loving parents? ¬† Read more »