Homosexual congressmen Barney Frank (D-Mass.) & Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) are promising that the next Pelosi ram-jam legislation will be the Employment Non-Discrimination Act -- the 'pièce de résistance' of the Gay Agenda.
ENDA would equate sexual deviancy rights to civil rights, thus requiring, for example, Christian schools to hire cross-dressing men.
UPDATE 4/22/10: “What ENDA could do is put transgender teachers in every classroom in America.”
-- From "ENDA Vote Coming Soon" by Chris Geidner, Metro Weekly 4/18/10
Legislation aimed at ending employment discrimination against LGBT people will be marked up in committee "this week or next," according to Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.). [bill HR 3017]
Frank, speaking to Metro Weekly after his appearance at the Victory Fund's annual Champagne Brunch, said the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) – currently in the House Education and Labor Committee – has been "promised" a quick vote in the full House by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) once the bill leaves committee.
In the past month, Frank has been speaking with increased confidence and specificity about House passage of ENDA. The legislation, which has been introduced in different forms in Congress since 1994, would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity for employers with 15 or more employees.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Barney And Barack's Anti-Religion Agenda" by J. Matt Barber, of Liberty Counsel posted at The Washington Times 4/18/10
According to its leftist proponents, ENDA would merely insulate people who choose to engage in homosexual conduct (sexual orientation) or those who suffer from gender confusion (gender identity) against employment intolerance. In truth, however, this legislation effectively would codify the very thing it purports to combat: workplace discrimination.
ENDA would force - under penalty of law - Christian, Jewish or Muslim business owners to adopt a secular-humanist viewpoint, ignoring all matters surrounding sexual morality while making hiring and firing decisions. Unlike race or sex, homosexual and cross-dressing behaviors are both volitional and mutable. Nonetheless, and despite the reality that such conduct is in direct conflict with every major world religion, thousands of years of history and uncompromising human biology, ENDA would compel business owners with 15 or more employees to leave sincerely held religious beliefs at the workplace door and submit to the demands of the homosexual activist lobby.
This is government-sanctioned viewpoint discrimination. It is no different from forcing a deeply religious business owner to hire and accommodate an "out and proud" adulterous "swinger." It directly alienates the unalienable rights of people of faith. It pits the government directly against the free exercise of religion and is, therefore, unconstitutional on its face.
During his second term, President George W. Bush issued a Statement of Administration Policy on ENDA, highlighting its unconstitutionality: "[ENDA] is inconsistent with the right to the free exercise of religion as codified by Congress in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA)."
President Obama, however, has publicly endorsed the bill and promises to sign it into law should it pass. This is in perfect keeping with his demonstrated belief that the federal government's constitutionally limited powers are more of a suggestion than a requirement. Mr. Obama has appointed at least one like-minded ENDA heavy. Chai R. Feldblum is a lesbian activist and sexual nihilist lawyer who in the past has publicly supported legalized polygamy and bisexual polyamory.
When asked about the Christian business owner or religious organization that morally objects to hiring people openly engaged in the homosexual lifestyle, Ms. Feldblum snapped: "Gays win, Christians lose." And where Americans' constitutionally guaranteed right to religious liberty comes into conflict with the postmodern concept of homosexual "rights," Ms. Feldblum has admitted having "a hard time coming up with any case in which religious liberty should win."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
The companion Senate bill (S 1584) has 44 co-sponsors, including two Republicans
