On July 22, 2012, the Baptist Press published an interview with Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy in which Cathy told the reporter that he held to the Biblical view of marriage, that it was ordained by God to be only between a man and a woman, and that he was afraid that God's judgment might fall harshly on America for substituting its own rationalistic view of marriage in place of God's.

Although President Obama held the same view through most of his presidency, but, like Clinton, had "evolved" politically in his view in favor of homosexual marriage only 6 months before Cathy's statement (as national elections approached), Obama was never assigned the kinds of slanderous labels that Cathy received from the Left when Obama had earlier expressed his religious views supporting only male-female marriage.  But of course, the political tide in America was changing rapidly at this point.

Chicago Mayor (and former Obama Chief of Staff) Rahm Emmanuel then swung strongly in support of the view of Chicago Alderman Proco "Joe" Moreno who announced to the press that he would block any effort of Chick-fil-A to open another restaurant in Chicago.  Emmanuel stated that Chick-fil-A "did not share Chicago's values" and thus was not welcome in his city.  That was immediately followed up by Boston Mayor Thomas Menino's statement to the Boston Herald that "it will be very difficult" for Chick-fil-A to obtain licenses for a restaurant in Boston.

This was of course in total violation of the right of any American to free speech, and total violation of the sacred American principle that no government agency has the power to act against an organization or individual because of their political or cultural opinions.  Even the very Liberal ACLU agreed on that constitutional point. Seeing the reaction that their announcements stirred up in the legal community, both the Chicago and Boston officials quickly backed away from their previous official boasts.

But the clear indicator was that the bullying by the pro-homosexual community against anyone disagreeing with their agenda was gathering momentum.

An incident occurring in early 2013 became a matter of national attention when the husband-wife owners of an Oregon bakery refused on religious grounds to bake a wedding cake for one of their regular customers, when the owners discovered that the wedding was to be between two women.  The customer then filed a complaint with Oregon's Bureau of Labor and Industries claiming discrimination under the Oregon anti-discrimination law.  News of the pending case quickly reached the public.  Then with protests outside the bakery and harsh treatment on Facebook, the Kleins closed their bakery, and attempted to continue their business from their home.

Finally in April of 2015 an Oregon administrative court imposed a $135,000 fine on the Kleins, which the Kleins then answered with a Go Fund Me appeal, which brought them $500,000, before Go Fund Me shut them down, claiming that their campaign was not compatible with the organization's philosophy.  Ultimately the commission's verdict was appealed (late 2017) but the Kleins failed to have the case reversed, and a further appeal to the Oregon Supreme Court (June 2018) resulted with the court refusing to hear the case, thus confirming the lower court's decision.

The Christian community had clearly and widely been thrown on the defensive culturally, finding it increasingly difficult to defend its long standing moral principles, ones that America was long founded on.  The Freedom from Religion Foundation (FFRF), along with other organizations such as the ACLU, had long taken up the mission of forcing the removal of any public display of religious (i.e., Christian) symbols around the country.

A dramatic example of that occurred in August of 2012 in Rhode Island, with a confrontation produced by the FFRF's on-going efforts to impose only a secular (or atheist) symbolization of American life, when the town's mayor announced that the city would not under any circumstances remove the cross (and "The Firefighters Prayer" and angel picture at the town's fire station) from the town square, despite the lawsuit that the FFRF threatened to bring on the town.  The cross atop the monument had stood there since 1921, honoring the town's soldiers who died in World War One (and subsequently World War Two).  The townspeople (and approximately 1500 protesters supporting the cross) ultimately backed up the mayor by quickly assembling a legal fund to defend the town's right to keep its beloved monuments.  In the end, the FFRF could not find a local citizen willing to take their position in a lawsuit, and the FFRF had to move on, unable to continue further.

Four years had now gone by since Obama took office as president and began to put into play his strategy for deep social change in America.  His Republican opponent was, interestingly enough, not exactly the proto-type WASP – because he was Mormon rather than a standard American Protestant.  In the end, it probably did not make a great deal of difference, because Obama would be re-elected by a natural tendency of Americans to vote on the basis of the sub-cultural groups that Obama had cultivated (or opposed) so strongly in his quest for "change."

Thus for instance, in a CNN exit poll conducted with 26,565 respondents, 93 percent of the Blacks voted for Obama (but constituting only 13 percent of all voters), while only 39 percent of the Whites (constituting 72 percent of the voters) did so.  Likewise 71 percent of the Latinos (10 percent of the voters) and 73 percent of those of Asian background (3 percent of the voters) voted for Obama.  American women (actually 53 percent of the voters!) tended also to vote for Obama, 55 percent compared to 44 percent for Romney – whereas the men were just the opposite, 52 percent voting for Romney against 44 percent who voted for Obama.  Age also made a difference, younger Americans voting for Obama (as much as 60 percent of the youngest or 18-29 age group) while older Americans (65 and over) voted in favor of Romney (56 percent against 44 percent for Obama).

Most interesting, although completely understandable in terms of America's cultural profile, those with little education voted strongly in favor of Obama, whereas those with a college degree voted for Romney (51 percent).  But at the highest educational level, those holding post-graduate degree (America's intellectuals or 18 percent of those voting), the profile was reversed, with 55 percent voting for Obama opposed to only 42 percent voting for Romney.

Urban America supported Obama 62 percent to 36 percent for Romney; suburban America 50 percent for Romney and 48 percent for Obama and in rural America 59 percent voted for Romney and 39 percent for Obama.  Income levels mattered as well, with those making less than $50,000 a year voting 60 percent for Obama; those with incomes above that level voted 53 percent in favor of Romney.

Then besides the racial divide, the next largest divide was on the basis of religion. Those attending church regularly (42 percent of the voters) voted in favor of Romney by 59 percent; those never attending (17 percent of the voters) voted for Obama by 62%.  Those attending occasionally tended to vote for Obama.  But those who identified themselves as White born-again Christians (about a quarter of those who voted) voted 78 percent for Romney.

In any case 51.1 percent of the total vote went to Obama with 47.2 percent going to Romney (and less than 2 percent "other").  The electoral vote was 332 votes for Obama and 206 for Romney.

On Saturday afternoon, August 2014, after returning from a store where he had seized a package of cigars and threatened the owner of the store when confronted about the theft, Michael Brown and a friend were walking down the middle of the street when patrolman Darren Wilson ordered them to move to the sidewalk. Brown was in no mood to obey and when Brown came up to the squad car, a scuffle resulted and Wilson's gun went off inside the squad car.  Brown's friend with him at the time reported that Brown had been grabbed by Wilson, who tried to pull him into the car (??? Brown was about twice the size of Officer Wilson!), Wilson then shot Brown in the back as he was retreating, then Brown turned and held his hands in the air saying "don't shoot," but Wilson shot and killed him anyway.

Hearing this story, over the next days, Ferguson Blacks (visited by the "Reverend" Al Sharpton, who always knows how to show up for just such events) began to protest, then pillage, then burn, as riot police gathered to try to protect property from the rioters.  Amazingly no one was killed in the riots.

But protests immediately spread to other cities, not only as Blacks turned out to protest "police brutality" (chanting the now-famous words "hands up, don't shoot") but as university students (such as those at nearby St. Louis University) found a new cause to demonstrate for racial justice and the end to poverty.

President Obama could not resist weighing in on the event and sent his Attorney General Eric Holder, who arrived in Missouri to comfort the Blacks who suffered under police prejudice, explaining that he himself experienced such racism and thus could feel their pain.  Anyway, that was the proclaimed theme of Holder's presence there.  Holder also promised that the Department of Justice would conduct its own investigation into the matter, knowing of course that the local police would be required to do so as well – adding to the impression that typical police racism would most likely simply sweep the matter under the rug.

Subsequently a police investigation was conducted, and autopsy results indicated that Brown was functioning at the time under the influence of marijuana, and also that Brown's friend had fabricated the story considerably – when other witnesses to the event came forward to tell a quite different story … namely, that the frenzied Brown did not have his hands up in surrender but instead was shot charging the policeman.  Forensics would substantiate this second version completely.

When a grand jury went over the evidence, the officer was found (in November's report) to have acted properly within the line of duty.

This was not the verdict that Ferguson Blacks wanted, and riots again broke out. "Hands up Don't shoot" appeared in signs and on t-shirts everywhere, despite the evidence that no such thing had been a part of the incident itself.  Eventually, and slowly (over a ten-day period) the riots would burn themselves out.

In the meantime, the Department of Justice investigation went forward as Holder had promised.  In the end, try as he might, even Holder had to admit finally (March 2015) that the Justice Department could find no basis for charges against Wilson (who meanwhile had left Ferguson under death threats).  But in his report, while admitting to the correctness of these findings, Holder could not resist delivering a long sermon on the deeper injustices that governed American society and how he could feel the pain of America's minorities.  In short, Holder was inviting America to pursue its cultural animosities, rather than find higher ground to come together over.

But this was quite in line with the White House's approach to rising racial tensions brought on by Obama's promise of "Change."

A government report which came out that same year cited figures for 2011, (the most recent year for which statistics were then fully available) that murder was the No. 1 killer of Black males of the age 15-34, running at 40 percent of the deaths in that age range (compared to 3.8 percent for White males of that same age). However, the report also pointed out that more Whites than Blacks are killed by police, almost on a 2 to 1 ratio, although Whites make up five times the number of Blacks, so therefore the percentage figure for Blacks is higher.

But in any case, there is not enough here to suggest what "Black Lives Matter" supposes: that somehow Blacks are subject to some especially high rate of killing by cops.  It is always important to remember the high murder rate of the violent neighborhoods that patrolmen are expected to police.  Also the supposition that victims of police shootings were themselves innocent victims of police brutality is refuted by the fact that more than half of the police shootings involved armed adversaries, and that nearly all other shootings were justified (and cleared by careful investigations which must accompany all police shootings) under the circumstances that they occurred, such as the Michael Brown shooting by police officer Darren Wilson.

And of course, Black Lives Matter.  The murder rate of young Blacks is a national tragedy.  The frustration of Blacks concerning the dangerous conditions they frequently live under is understandable.  But blaming the police is a horrible distraction from the real causes, which are: little moral training in manhood by missing fathers, poor educational motivation, high unemployment, and gang membership as the only option that many young Blacks find as their path to manhood.¹  All of this serves to create a very violent environment in which both police and civilians are expected to function in a civilized fashion.

¹In 1965, as Johnson's Great Society got underway, 25% of Black children were born out of wedlock. That number in the 2010s was running at 70%.
     Even Obama himself – in one of his less ideological moments – once commented (on Father's Day of 2008, when first running for the presidency), "Children who grow up without a father are five times more likely to live in poverty and commit crime; nine times more likely to drop out of schools, and 20 times more likely to end up in prison. They are more likely to have behavioral problems, or run away from home or become teenage parents themselves. And the foundations of our community are weaker because of it."

In August of 2016, San Francisco 49er quarterback Colin Kaepernick refused to stand at the playing of the national anthem, choosing instead to kneel during the music, in protest against the systematic racial oppression (especially by police), basic racial inequality and general injustice in American society, thus starting a trend that involved a growing number of (largely Black) players also kneeling at games during the playing of the national anthem. 

Needless to say, this stirred a huge racial controversy among football fans, which President Obama once again jumped into when in September of that year he spoke of the huge problem of racism afflicting America, and the importance of taking a stand to show our opposition to this evil.  Everyone understood what part of American society he was referring to (once again) as the source of the problem of racism, seemingly unable to understand that his constant intervention – and the position he was always certain to take on this issue – served only to stir a more aggressive racism on both sides of the Black-White divide.