Thursday, August 22, 2013

The Shocking, True Face of "Nondiscrimination" in San Antonio

San Antonio nondiscrimination is...a Big Lie."To my knowledge or since I have been city
manager there have not been any complaints regarding discrimination based on sexual

San Antonio City Manager, Sheryl Scully - Aug. 28th.

[Update: Wednesday, September 4. Citizens to be Heard. Be there by 4:45 pm to get inside. Or come by 6:00 pm and stand outside a couple hours. Wear blue. Sign up online after 8:00 am to speak or to secure a minute you can give to another speaker (at City Hall, 100 Military Plaza) Contact City Council Olympia, WA - 2012: A horrified mom summons police about a naked man that was lounging in the girls' sauna. Police arrive - and are powerless to intervene, their hands tied by a "nondiscrimination" ordinance.

Fort Worth, TX - 2011:  A Christian teenager in Fort Worth (a city that already has lgbt nondiscrimination) was suspended from school because a teacher overheard him saying that homosexuality is wrong
These ordinances codify anti-Christian bias into local law. They grant a badge of civic invincibility to gays and transsexuals -fostering an oppressive climate of political correctness , where everyone has to defer to them, where criticism of them is punishable by law, and where, if an lgbt is underperforming at work, it's almost impossible to fire them. These ordinances are like a social-engineering V.I.P. pass -serving as the vehicle for introducing an aggressive flood of gay propaganda into public schools to brainwash kids, as has happened elsewhere in the wake of these ordinances.

This ordinance is not about "equality" and "inclusiveness", but part of a larger, carefully-scripted agenda, one I've studied for years. Proponents of it use semantics and noble-sounding verbage to try to sell you on it. They pay lip service to universal values and fairness,  but that is all a lie - a Big Lie. These  activists are unfolding a satanically-inspired agenda, a gay agenda. The Nazis used the Big Lie tactic - the method of aggressively promoting a falsehood until it's eventually embraced as real - in that case, saying the Jews were the actual oppressors in Germany. LGBT nondiscrimination is a society-crippling power play by those who have become drunk with power, those who's politics are eerily-similar to that of the Nazis. Like the Nazis were with the Jews, today's gays are at war with Christians, and use the Big Lie tactic to paint them as oppressors, so much so that special legislation (nondiscrimination) is supposedly necessary to be free from their "tyranny".

LGBT nondiscrimination ordinances function as a weapon to force Christians -and other conscientious people- to affirm/endorse homosexuality/gender-bending under penalty of law. They function not as a shield to protect lgbts from "discrimination" but as a sword for inflicting damage against people who oppose their destructive goals.

Here, the author of the influential gay liberation network, boasts:
"...we must forcefully remind other Americans that we need legal equality in more than just marriage, but in employment, housing and public accommodations. We must also remind other Americans that we demand more than simple legal equality -- we demand LGBT-affirming education in all of the nation's public schools..."

The San Antonio Media Lied. They lied that a prominent local Pastor (Hagee) supported the ordinance. They lied about gay Ex-Marine Eric Alva getting booed off stage. They lied about Councilwoman Elisa Chan's true comments. They lied about the supposed climate of exclusion and discrimination in San Antonio. This ordinance is a Big Lie.

Regarding the endless push for the supposed need for LGBT (Lesbian, Gay Bi-sexual, Transgender) non discrimination in San Antonio, let's see how well this Big Lie holds up:

Jay Henry Smith, in a Facebook post, says: "What a load of crap. I've been an open gay man in San Antonio and the only time I was verbally bashed was in Austin, not here. And I've never been physically attacked. Our police chief was the grand marshal of our pride parade a few years ago, we have a gay man on the city council. But because one council person has anti-gay feelings we are on a 'travel alert'? I've never heard of your group until today, and you are obviously trying to scare people to raise your own profiles. Shame on you. This is why I can't support most national/statewide GLBT groups, so many of you are in it for personal gains, not for the betterment of the community."
9 · August 20 at 9:35am

And here's another homosexual - in a discussion about the ordinance - who truly 'gets it': "As a gay man myself, I would never turn away gays...especially beefy, hairy ones. The more the merrier really. It's the principle that I'm talking about. Businesses don't need more regulations hanging over their heads. If, as a business, I do discriminate, feel free to voice your opposition and boycott. That's how it works y'all" And gay activists in Waco, where nondiscrimination is being discussed also, made statements to reporters that undermine and nullify the very rationale and justification for these ordinances everywhere:"Carmen Saenz [a prominent gay activist] said she knows of no cases of employment discrimination against LBGT workers in Waco city government. Nor has she ever faced discrimination living openly as a lesbian for 11 years in Waco."

And Waco gay activist Erma Ballenger is saying the city doesn’t need to have hard evidence of discrimination to justify a nondiscrimination policy.

“We’re acknowledging there is no factual data, but there’s no way of collecting that data,” she said.

Just recently, a KENS 5 anchor engaged the issue. Barry Davis, of KENS 5, interviewed Dan Graney of  gay rights group C.A.U.S.A.

 Davis, citing the lack of evidence to justify nondiscrimination policy change in San Antonio, asked Graney:

" What the police spokesperson said, 'we've only had 6 hate crimes in the City of San Antonio, not 6 against the LGBT community or anything, can you cite specific incidences, Mr. Graney, of discrimination"?
Graney: "Well without a commission or an office in the city to collect claims of can we document that. "When people experience a hate crime, sometimes they're afraid to come forward, because they're afraid of retaliation and their safety..." - basically he's saying, no, there's no way we can prove discrimination unless the ordinance passes, and that there are no reports of hate crimes (against lgbt's) because the victims are unwilling to report it. Interestingly, a gay activist, appearing before a Salina, KS City Council last year, stated the exact same things when City Council asked them to show evidence to justify non discrimination in that locale (that ordinance was killed by the voters).
And this commentator wrote:
"People do not want to be forced to transgress their beliefs even though they must leave the sanctuary of the church and exist in the world. Where is the need to rob the most basic rights of association and conscience, forbid people from the public market by ordinance unless they submit to participation in repellent behaviour, and clear the way for lawsuits to obliterate remaining dissent? Let people do business, and let them succeed or fail on their merits. Let others arise without religious compunctions and provide the services unconscionable to the religious. Where is the need to morally enslave those who disagree with you? ".

Where is the proof in the assertion that gays and transsexuals are being fired for their sexual identities in San Antonio? Where's the reliable research  to justify these policy changes?

There isn't any.

At the heart of the grievances by outspoken San Antonio gays/transexuals is the issue of personhood: what constitutes one's own personhood. The Courts have decided to bestow "suspect classification" to individuals based on immutable, unchangable, and inborn characteristics, like race. Gays and transgenders have no such characteristics, but they strive to define their very personhood by their sexual attraction. A sexual preference does not a person make. So when they say things like, being denied protections for 'who they are', that's an inaccurate, flawed assessment. There are ex-gays everywhere, people like Little Richard and actress Anne Heche. And there are *ex-straights*, as it were, people like Ellen Degeneres (who preaches 'born that way'). You can't justify policy changes to reflect such a transient reality.

The basis of the purported need for added 'protections' is merely the theoretical possibility of discrimination and exclusion, not the actual presence of it, not actual trends. they are speaking from the realm of paranoid delusion about a possible threat. I mean, the proof is right there in local hate crime statistics. This ordinance isn't a grass-roots thing, but the brainchild of several out-of-town and National-level gay activist groups.
This ordinance is dangerous. Women and girls (as well as men and boys) have a right to privacy in public locker rooms or restrooms. If this ordinance passes, not only will any man be able to enter public spaces reserved for women, but lewd exhibitionists will expose themselves to women and children in restrooms, locker rooms, and saunas, as occurred at Evergreen State College in Washington in the Fall of 2012.
Churches that rent facilities to the public will also fall under this “nondiscrimination” mandate and will be forced to offer their sanctuaries for same-sex weddings. This happened in Ocean Grove, N.J., where Courts there ruled that if they (a Methodist Church there) use their facility to any other groups, they are required by law to rent them out for homosexual ceremonies.

An example of the intolerance this ordinance will foster is illustrated by Twitter’s censorship of a local pastor’s account. Even though the pastor was only making people aware of the upcoming vote, Twitter shut down his account. And then there's the case of Elisa Chan.
Councilwoman Chan was set up, baited and coerced by her "aides" (really "moles" planted by gay activists) into making controversial statements, them leading the conversation - step-by-step - to prompt her remarks, which were then plucked from their respective contexts, cut-and-pasted to a separate one to create a convenient victim-mongering narrative in support of this ordinance.

Chai Feldblum, (the gay activist pushing for LGBT nondiscrimination on a national level)  President Obama’s EEOC commissioner, has called the clash between religious liberty and advancing homosexuality a “zero-sum game,” meaning that someone wins and someone loses.
Guess who loses in Feldblum’s book? She has “a hard time coming up with any case in which religious liberty should win...Gays win, Christians lose". (Also of note, Feldblum has said, "Gay sex is a moral good").

Elane's Photography. Arlene's Flowers. MasterPiece Cakes. Hands-On Originals (apparel). Sweet Cakes by Melissa. Timber Creek B&B. Riverside B&B. Aloha B&B - just a few cases where Christian small business owners were dragged into bankrupting lawsuits for not abandoning their Christian consciences to endorse and affirm homosexuality. That last example, the Judge explicitly overruled their religious freedom in favor of gay "rights". And just days ago, the N.M. Supreme Court ruled that Elane's Photography had to prioritize gay "rights" over their religious convictions.

This ordinance is Lavender Big Brother's immense, totalitarian boot, thundering down hard upon people who are wise and wary to the harm that mainstreaming of homosexuality/gender confusion produces.

"Lavender Big Brother" HATES "tolerance". LOATHS "diversity" and "inclusiveness"...when applied to opposing views. L.B.B., in his culture-crushing, social-engineering war machine, steamrolls BRUTALLY over the proud Catholic legacies of San Antonians. The media is revving up it's propaganda into overdrive. They've spun phony stories (Elisa Chan, Eric Alva's), and recycled overused victimhood propaganda sentiments, ad infitum.

The gay lobby is a well-oiled machine, savvy, dynamic; an army of feverishly-driven anti-Christian Marxist mercenaries - loyal footsoldiers, hell-bent on abolishing this Nation's proud moral legacy and reconstructing from the ashes a new world where they (and their morally-optional, sexually-freewheeling, depraved sensibilities) rule supreme. They've descended on the State of Texas, as per a specific strategy, for corrupting the uncorruptable: Texas has always had a reputation for being this proud bastion of moral, cultural, and political sovereignty. Gay activists want to supplant that pride with gay 'pride'; with loose, depraved sexual values promoted and pushed by the Gay Agenda's Finest back in San Francisco, New York, Boston, and Miami. Currently, gay activist websites from other Texas cities are urging and organizing gay communities there to drive in from all over the state to crowd the City Council chambers, for to misrepresent the true numbers of disgruntled LGBTs, a kind of shock-and-awe tactic. Progressives and gay activists want to make an example out of Texas, basically saying;  'Now that we've superimposed our demoralizing propaganda on all the other big Texas cities, we shall now take the "Heart" of Texas - San Antonio'. We must defend the Heart of Texas at all costs. We must defend the uncorruptable from this satanically-inspired onslaught. Lavender Big Brother is an expatriate of the culturally-bankrupt East and West Coasts, and we Texans must resist those trends here at all costs. Scott Lively, the world's foremost expert on the harms of mainstreaming homosexuality, said this (about LGBT nondiscrimination ordinances): "[They are] the seed containing the entire tree of the gay agenda, and all it's poisonous fruit".

These ordinances are a solution in search of a problem. How can a tiny subset of society demand special rights on the basis of a condition or trait that has zero distinguishing merits or proof to even validate it? Researchers have constantly failed to locate biological indicators for homosexuality. Blacks and women can objectively prove their personhood, gays can't. American Justice demands tangible, objective evidence to merit policy change . The validating standards respective to homosexuality exist soley in the realm of subjectivity. And since there's no tangible distinguishing merits, how can there ever be any reliable research done to prove they are being victimized for that invisible trait? So for them to say they're being "excluded for who they are", is yet another Big Lie.

These ordinances create a climate of gender confusion, and In the case of transsexuals, this ordinance forces EVERYONE to engage in the same delusion as that person does about their fraudulent gender, and allow them into women's and girls' restrooms/locker rooms/ fitting rooms (and vice-versa for males).

Philosopher Voltaire once wrote, "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you're not allowed to criticize". People nationwide are getting fired for simply posting gay-critical tweets. Governor Susanna Martinez was refused service by her gay hairstylist because of her quotes against gay marriage days prior. Senator Stacey Campfield had made similar remarks critical of homosexuality in the days prior to him getting refused service at a restaurant for his views.

In Massechussettes and California, where LGBT nondiscrimination-type ordinances have really took over the cultural/political arena, boys may move freely about girls' restrooms/locker rooms (and vice-versa) in the public schools there. And gay power has such a stranglehold over politicians and government, they cannot even perform their duties right.

Natalie Johnson of San Antonio was fired for not engaging in such a delusion by asking a cross-dressing man not to reenter the women's fitting room.

In San Diego, CA, that city's Firefighters were forced to walk in the gay pride parade against their objections

The owner of, a devout and avowed Christian, was successfully sued by homosexuals (via the statewide N.J. nondiscrimination ordinance) for not using his matchmaking site to pair up gays - something the site owner objected to on moral grounds. He was not only successfully sued, but as a condition of the ruling (and the only way he could continue doing business in that state), he had to create a separate gay-oriented dating site, and then merge it with his original, Christian-inspired model (Heterosexual unions). This case demonstrates that, in places hosting these ordinances, Christians can be sued and discriminated against in the most indirect of ways.

I have seen how, in places that have these ordinances (as well as other pro-gay legislation) where gay activists will purposely locate, single out, and descend upon reputable Christian-oriented businesses, unleash powerful lawsuits, win, set a precedent, and then go on to the next Christian business, and the next, and the next, and the next - until every person of faith who does business in that locale is forced to abandon either their Christian conscience or their very livelihood in order to appease the gays. That is what these nondiscrimination ordinances are truly about. Gays have, waiting in the wings, hugely-funded umbrella organizations, always waiting with a team of powerful lawyers anytime a homosexual anywhere is challenged.

Mayor Castro and Diego Bernal go on camera to deflect people's concerns about the San Antonio version of this, rephrasing it with euphemisms and cozy-sounding terminology, making cosmetic changes in it - just enough to try to disengage the Pastors speaking against it, but it's still basically the same ordinance - a weapon for silencing Christians within the public square. Here, the harmful, unconstitutional aspects of the San Antonio ordinance are highlighted, point-by-point:

Let us delve, for a moment, into the realm of possibility of potential harms. Everyone is familiar with the Hooters bar and restaurant chain. This company has a storied (and lucrative) reputation for employing the most virtuous and feminine girls. In the wake of lgbt nondiscrimination, if a transgender man -surgically augmented breasts and all - applies to be a dancer/waitress there, that company is sued if they employ common sense and deny (him).

Or, how about how it applies to people who adhere to their godly values in the public square. If a Christian book store owner denies employment to exemplars of sexual deviancy, he too, will be hit with a lawsuit. Or a publishing company with a long reputation of hosting the works and world views of Christians - what if they deny their service to a gay author who has a sordid reputation for publishing depraved, immoral sexual values? That publisher would be sued.

Ladies and girls, how do you feel about sharing your sanctifiably-feminine retreats within public facilities with a man - when you're finishing up at the gym, in your most exposed state? Or perhaps your little girl, disrobed in the locker room of her pool? Will she be understanding of "tolerance" after being exposed to a man's penis? After all, the transgender criteria does not require the surgery, only the self-identifying.

When your godly young relatives are ready to find housing on their own, will they be forced to cohabitate -either in a roommate or building situation- with exemplars of sin-centric sexual deviancy?
The daycare provider who cares for your little ones while you're at work will be forced to hire any gay or transsexual that applies or get sued

Let us look at 'Exhibit -A' showing how gays tend to abuse the power these ordinances grant them.
A gay-rights group called Freedom to Work, wanting to expose the lack of lgbt nondiscrimination in the Texas-based Exxon-Mobil, recently put Exxon to the test by submitting applications from two fictional job seekers for a position in one of the company's offices in Illinois. Illinois is among the 21 states banning sexual orientation discrimination.

FTW says that there were essentially only two substantive differences between the candidates. Candidate 1 had better grades (in high school and college) than candidate 2, and candidate 1 was an outspoken gay-rights advocate. Exxon attempted several times to contact candidate 2 for further interviews but dismissed candidate 1 entirely.
 Based on the response to these fictional candidates, Freedom To Work has filed a discrimination lawsuit against Exxon Mobil in Illinois. Here you see homosexuals using this legal tool as a means of forcing affirmation of their lifestyle down everyone's throats.
Let's look at how homosexuals tend to abuse this power:

In Granbury, Tx, a gay man is suing his bank because, in his mind, he should've gotten more promotions in the 11 years he'd been working there; because of his unreasonable expectations from his bosses.  In Fort Worth, a Tarrant County College Professor -and a lesbian- successfully sued that University for the same reasons - her belief that they didn't advance her career enough based on her sexuality, despite the lack of proof of any real reason. In Killgore, Tx, a lesbian High School student sued softball coaches who 'outed' her to her mother out of concern for the girl's age-innapropriate relationship with an adult.
And homosexuality is deviancy. It is demonstrably, intrinsically disordered. Gays and bi-sexuals, who account for barely 2% of the American population, account for over half of the total number of H.I.V. cases in America. They are drastically overrepresented in total cases of syphilis, Hepatitis, and a wide range of debilitating medical conditions that arise from rampant promiscuity. LGBTs have greatly elevated levels of psychiatric disorders and substance abuse. Lesbians endure elevated rates of cancer, obesity, substance abuse and mental disorders. The work of Dr. Paul Cameron finds that LGBTs live decades less than heterosexuals.

The aggressive promotion of homosexuality is like a cancer that's killing our Nation's proud moral legacy. LGBT nondiscrimination ordinances are the gilded key for these depraved activists to infiltrate all areas of life we hold dear. We must stop this. We must defend the legacy of San Antonio - the heart of Texas. Educate yourself on the many destructive aspects of nondiscrimination ordinances, as well as all gay activism, at

San Antonio City Council meets with the Public on Wednesdays at 2pm in council chambers.


  1. So let's start with your big fat lie, since you claim a lot of unfounded lies in this rambling post. You said "his ordinance isn't a grass-roots thing, but the brainchild of several out-of-town and National-level gay activist groups."

    I can speak from authority that this is far from the truth. In fact, you can ask almost anyone involved, including Mayor Castro, I was the one who is the brain-child behind the ordinance and the changes to city code. I pulled together local individuals, not some "out-of-town and National-level gay activist groups" to discuss this. We met on a Sunday at the Firebowl restaurant in the Quarry.

    The problem is, I'm not even sure you know where that's at since this post came from Olympia, WA. So maybe YOU are the "out-of-town" person here. Maybe you should let SAT individuals deal with local matters.

  2. I have personally viewed facebook pages by gay activists from other cities who were mobilizing those non-San Antonio residents to overwhelm City Council chambers with their numbers.

    One of the constant justifications for San Antonio nondiscrimination is to emulate other cities nationwide who have it, to make San Antonio "fully inclusive".

    Julian Castro is in line to get massive kick-backs from this (the gay lobby is mega-funded).