Hillary Clinton made it very clear that true religious liberty would be a thing of the past if she is elected President. In a speech to the nation’s largest LGBT advocacy organization the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) this weekend, Hillary vowed her unwavering support for the so-called Federal Equality Act, which, if enacted, would add “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to list of protected classes, leaving no room for religious objections to everything from participating in a same-sex wedding to biological males using female restrooms and locker rooms.
This speech comes from a woman who opposed same-sex marriage for more than two decades and who was recently caught telling aids in secret emails that she didn’t like gender inclusive language, which is a staple issue of gay-rights activists.
In his article at National Review, Andrew Walker breaks down Hillary’s latest comments to the HRC audience:
[Hillary] also made belittling remarks about religious liberty, particularly in the context of Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis and Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). This is particularly ironic, since it was Hillary’s husband, Bill Clinton, who signed a federal RFRA into law back in the 1990s, when gay rights weren’t as fashionable as they are today. What’s more, candidate Clinton’s rhetoric went to great lengths to paint anyone who disagrees with the morality of the LGBT worldview as being beneath the threshold of respect. She read the very worst into her opponents’ views, making it impossible for reasoned debate to occur. The pitched, glossed-over caricatures of religious liberty elicited by Clinton are unbecoming for someone of her stature, and furthermore, they devalue by way of cynicism a bedrock value at the heart of our Constitution.
Here’s why the Clinton speech was important: To have the likely Democratic nominee for the presidency of the United States take the stage to pan and insult religious liberty in the most caricatured and indecent of ways signals just how vulnerable religious liberty is. It was unimaginable, as little as three or four years ago, that a candidate from the Democratic party would leverage every available asset to assault a principle at the foundation of our constitutional order.
The craziest thing about all of this? Liberals and late-night talk show hosts love to talk about religious Americans as close-minded and intolerant of other views.
But Hillary Clinton is showing that it’s actually the so-called progressives who are trying to shut down debate in this country, refusing to even acknowledge that there are good, nice people who disagree with them on things like men using women’s restrooms and religious people being able to politely decline participation in a same-sex wedding.