LGBT Gazillionaire Declares War On Right — Will ‘Punish The Wicked’

It’s getting pretty obvious that this clash was never about ‘tolerance’. It was about control.

I guess Tim Gill hasn’t come across Joseph Sciambra’s ‘surviving gay‘ column, or he might not be so quick to throw around the word ‘wicked’… glass houses and all that.

Tim Gill is worth (at last estimate) nearly half a billion dollars. And he knows it.

But like so many on the left, all his talents and resources are eventually weaponized against their enemies.

In this guy’s case, it’s against the Church.

Because you know, he can’t be bothered to wait for the Supreme Court to rule on the now-bankrupted Christian Baker.

Now that he’s a super-wealthy ‘Important Person’, he has to use his wealth to destroy the livelihoods and families of ordinary people who’ve never heard of him. People whose great sin is that they have no wish to participate in Gay weddings.

Of course, he’ll say it’s ‘righteous’ and (un-ironically) ‘anti-fascist’ to destroy his political enemies for stubbornly disagreeing with his cause.

Because from here in the cheap seats, destroying families in a fit of political pique seems… what’s the word… ‘wicked’.

For context, here is some back-and-forth between The Rolling Stone, who first published the interview where he made the ‘punish the wicked’ quote, and the Federalist who called them out on it.

First, some background. Gill has used the phrase ‘punish the wicked’ as a rallying cry for years. ‘The wicked’ is anyone who stands in the way of progress on equal rights for LGBTQ people: politicians, activists, lawyers, some people of faith, and plenty more with no religious affiliation whatsoever.
Ah, so “the wicked’” whom Gill says need to be “punished” are indeed Christians, as well as everyone who agrees with them. Anyone who stands up for a Christian’s right to live in accordance with his or her religious beliefs will also be targeted for harassment in public and the legal system. Further, he clearly defines “wickedness” as adhering to centuries-old Christian (and Jewish and Muslim) beliefs on human identity and sexuality. To Gill, orthodox Christian beliefs comprise “wickedness.” Thanks for clearing that up. –Federalist

But we wonder… Will this ‘heroic defender’ of LGBT issues be taking a stand against Islam, as well? Because, by several orders of magnitude, one is a greater threat to individual people that advocacy group represents.

It seems he’s taking a shotgun to a horsefly and ignoring the charging bear.

We understand he’s pissed that Christians won’t solemnize a wedding. But seriously? Where does that fit in the big picture? Homosexuality is still punishable by death in a number of Muslim countries. And there are groups in America who subscribe to the laws that advocate that.

(Hint: The Pulse shooter didn’t stop for prayers in a Church or a Temple days before murdering dozens in the nightclub.)

Forget the fact that Muslims have begun a hostile takeover of Europe, or that two countries in Europe are nuclear powers. Or that Islam has a thousand-year history of aggression toward its neighbors and brutal suppression of its victims.

Tim is chasing targets that won’t hit back: Christians. That’s not particularly courageous. Especially for someone who thinks nothing of dropping a couple of million dollars into a political campaign. It’s a strong indication of a lack of integrity that he’s focussing on Churches.

Who cares that there is — right now — a case pending before the Supreme Court that will decide the LEGAL standing of this decision?

(Powerful people don’t wait to find out what the law is. Why should they if they can just bully little people into compliance. That’s the entire game plan of intersectional feminism’s political arm. And Progressives like him also are known for creating fake ‘grassroots movements’ to move the ball down the field, as referenced in the Federalist article cited.)

Have ‘elites’ not yet figured out that tactics like this in Hollywood, In the Media, by LGBT and wealthy execs are EXACTLY the reason people like Trump get elected in the first place?

Gill wouldn’t object, you can be sure, that Kat Von Dumbass revoked a prize from the winner of her makeup company’s contest for the sin of having supported Trump.

He wouldn’t mind that musicians and Hollywood types have forbidden them to use their music or work because they don’t want their name associated with a Republican cause.

But if a Christian who won’t make wedding cakes for homosexual marriages (even though he will gladly do NON-customized work for homosexual customers) and won’t do Halloween or Sexually-explicit work, either, he is marked for destruction.

What’s the plan, Gil? Throw him off a tall building?

Oh wait. That’s what Islam would do to you, given the chance. But priorities, yo.

What’s that old Atheist line? ‘There is No God and I hate him.’

Be honest. That’s what’s REALLY driving this, isn’t it?

It doesn’t matter how rich, powerful, physically strong, or well-connected someone is – when your ideas are so weak that you need to BULLY someone to comply with them, you are NOT behaving like a strong man.

People that BULLY rather than persuade need to get their hands on this book.

The Effeminization Of The American Male
by Doug Giles


Doug Giles, best-selling author of Raising Righteous And Rowdy Girls and Editor-In-Chief of the mega-blog, ClashDaily.com, has just penned a book he guarantees will kick hipster males into the rarefied air of masculinity. That is, if the man-child will put down his frappuccino; shut the hell up and listen and obey everything he instructs them to do in his timely and tornadic tome. Buy Now:The Effeminization Of The American Male

Screen Shot 2016-08-27 at 8.24.46 AM

Share if you think this brand of ‘tolerance’ looks more like retribution.

Like Clash? Like Clash.

Leave a Comment

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.