Freedom Conflicts with the Gay Agenda–Persecution in Maine Begins

freedom_conflicts

Freedom of Speech

Freedom of Conscience

Freedom to Believe

Homosexuals have always had the same exact rights as heterosexuals–the right to marry someone of the opposite sex.  They don’t want equality–they want special treatment–the right to discriminate against one gender or the other, in order to create a gender-specific union.

The story of Don Mendell illustrates exactly what happens when the gay agenda conflicts with freedom.  There is no tolerance for dissent.

–Beetle Blogger

See this from Maine:

STATEMENT FROM STAND FOR MARRIAGE MAINE
REGARDING THREAT TO YES ON 1 TV AD SPOKESMAN DON MENDELL

“I want to alert you to a disturbing development that confirms what we have been saying about the larger threat that redefining marriage poses to every Mainer.

“Don Mendell, one of our spokesmen who appeared in a television ad for Stand for Marriage Maine, has come under attack by our opponents.

“Don is a high school guidance counselor and licensed social worker. His appearance in the television ad prompted a complaint to the Maine Department of Professional and Financial Regulation – requesting that his license to practice social work in the state of Maine be stripped away – simply because of his personal opinion on marriage.

“It is ironic that those who claim tolerance as their highest value prove themselves to be so intolerant that they would go so far as to threaten a father’s career and put his family’s future at risk. This latest attack highlights the true agenda of those who demand that marriage be redefined.

“No one who opposes Question 1 is in similar danger from those who support marriage between one man and one woman.

“Our opponents want to shut us down. We have no interest in limiting free speech and threatening the right of conscience for those who disagree. So who’s really intolerant?

“This attack proves that a “YES” vote next Tuesday is about much more than protecting marriage. It is also about preserving free speech, religious liberty and right of conscience and about what is taught to children.

“This threat to Don and his family’s livelihood is proof that those who demand marriage be redefined seek to punish and silence those who disagree.

“It is our hope that the Department of Professional and Financial Regulation dismisses this complaint for what it is – nonsense. The Alliance Defense Fund – a legal alliance of attorneys committed to defending the right of people to freely live out their faith – is considering potential action on behalf of Don’s fundamental liberties.

“If the people of Maine vote Yes on Question 1 to protect marriage, we have hope that free speech and religious liberty will be respected. If marriage is not protected, Don will only be the first victim.

Advertisements

10 Comments

  1. Ross said,

    October 31, 2009 at 10:09 am

    From the ethical code of Social Workers at socialworkers.org

    a) Social workers should understand culture and its function in human behavior and society, recognizing the strengths that exist in all cultures.

    (b) Social workers should have a knowledge base of their clients’ cultures and be able to demonstrate competence in the provision of services that are sensitive to clients’ cultures and to differences among people and cultural groups.

    (c) Social workers should obtain education about and seek to understand the nature of social diversity and oppression with respect to race, ethnicity, national origin, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, marital status, political belief, religion, immigration status, and mental or physical disability.
    ———————————–

    Given Mr. Mendell’s prior quotes in a variety of news sources, he has clear bias towards people of a different sexual orientation.

  2. beetlebabee said,

    October 31, 2009 at 10:15 am

    How convenient that having an opinion violates a ‘code of ethics’. What kind of code of ethics silences free speech? Sounds to me like a witch hunt.

  3. mlabot said,

    October 31, 2009 at 10:17 am

    This is an illustration of exactly what the yes campaign has been saying. There is no tolerance for dissent in the gay agenda. If we continue to allow the normalization of homosexuality, we’ll be giving away our freedoms.

    How does giving your freedom away affect your family?

  4. Phil said,

    October 31, 2009 at 12:36 pm

    This article uses the passive voice, so it doesn’t identify _who_ complained about Don Mendell. It would seem logical that anyone in the entire state of Maine could complain to the Maine Department of Financial and Social regulation…that doesn’t mean that the complaint will amount to anything.

    According to the Kennebec Journal, the person filing the complaint (“Ann”) is identified as a counselor from another school.

    The complaint also cited an email from a student.

    http://kennebecjournal.mainetoday.com/news/local/7042766.html

  5. beetlebabee said,

    October 31, 2009 at 1:45 pm

    No one is claiming it is a campaigner doing the accusing. It’s simply harassment using the same logic those pushing the gay agenda use. If it’s originating from an actual gay activist or not is irrelevant, however we can pretty much guess from the context of the article who was likely behind it. The point is that this man is being persecuted for speaking his mind on this issue.

    Do you defend his right to free speech Phil?

  6. October 31, 2009 at 2:16 pm

    It kills me that this is all done in the name of human rights, when that is exactly what is being destroyed. Thanks for posting this!!

  7. turtle head said,

    October 31, 2009 at 5:26 pm

    I have knowledge that this complaint was filed by Ann Sullivan,the social worker in the elementary school in the same school district…who does NOT work with Mr Mendell at all. They probably see each other a few times a year at schooldistrict wide meetings, but have no other contact. The anonymous statements from students…how does she know this if she is not in his school…..and how does she have all this knowledge of what goes on in the high school if she doesnt work there? Please tell me how she would know all these things, smells like a conspiracy to me. The counseling profession/social workers in schools are being taken over by homosexuals and gay sympathizers who ARE pushin the gay agenda…Since the complaint has been filed, he must now defend himself…and theirony of this is he must respond to her complaint, she can have 10 days to respond to his response..and then the committee meets on it! He doesnt get to respond to her baseless accusations on the second time around. This information is available on the licensing web site…..this part of maine is a small town…most people know what is going on and who is doing what.

  8. Onslow said,

    November 1, 2009 at 10:59 am

    This further shows who we are dealing with. Nothing more than a bunch of extremist thugs determined to impose their perverted vision of the world on everybody else.

    Their ultimate goal – “queering” of elementary school children.

    Their means — anything and everything, such as frivolous “legal” claims, intimidation, harassment, violence, death threats, etc.

    If you still believe this is about “equality”, you are, at best, very short-sighted, at worst a complete and utter idiot.

  9. pomegranateappleblog said,

    November 1, 2009 at 6:58 pm

    wow

  10. Chairm said,

    November 3, 2009 at 6:02 pm

    I agree that this is an example that illustrates where the ‘logic’ of SSM argumentation forces society to go.

    If it is bigoted to believe, to say, and to act on one’s conscience, that marriage is the union of husband and wife and provides for responsible procreation, then, the complaint forms the basis for denying — or for challenging — the accreditation and the employ of an individual who disagrees with the merger of SSM and marriage in our laws.

    But it is not bigoted to support the societal prerference for sex integration and responsible procreation, combined at the core of the relationship type we recognize as marriage.

    SSMers provide no sound basis for distinguishing SSM from the rest of the nonmarriage category. So namecalling is about as far as they can go. When public and officious namecalling leads to threats to the licensing of professionals, explect the parents, the schoolchildren, and the rest of us to be made captive audiences for the sort of “teachable moments” like the one that Ann has hoped to provide.

    Name a profession and the SSM “logic” will be pressed into its code of ethics.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: