Well at the end of the day, as so ably described by you, it was, I believe, all about you and your seriously narrowed minded views Babette.
And possibly explains why you and your narrow views, were "diplomatically" rejected by so many venues or bailing speakers.
Similarly, the equally informed and intellectual tea party movement, can't understand why support is leaving them in droves, even by committed Christians?
Christians who patently no longer wish to beat or hear the drum of blah blah intended preferential disadvantage and discrimination!
Neither of which is any part of a true esoteric Christian message.
Little wonder groups like Isil are winning the battle for hearts and minds, when Christians are allegedly misrepresented by extremely narrow-minded/narrow focus, vociferous groups like yours?
If J.C. were to walk among us today, and given his well reported preferences and predilection for almost exclusive male company; and alleged preferred celibacy?
Your group, first and foremost, I believe, would have been pushing and jostling to get on the bandwagon, to condemn him as a faggot!?
I hope you had plenty of "tea" to wash down that feast Babette?
A steel mesh fence Babette?
Be careful what you wish for!
Rhrosty

I may disagree with them but they too deserve the ability to hold their meetings without threat, the ferals behaviour was inexcusable and indefensible. Yes, they too had the right to be there and to protest, but not to aggressively interfere as they do so often, especially in scaring off our timorous pollies.
I for one would like to know where any and all elected "members" stand on these and associated issues, wouldn't you?

Bruce summed it up for me. I don't agree with much of what Babette has to say however my disagreement is considerably stronger in regards to those who use intimidation to shut down others rights to a peacefull meeting. I've not seen any sign that Babette and those likely to attend meeetings organised by her would be inciting violence against others, there are aspects of what they push for that I consider a form of violence by government but less so than what many others advocate for.

I've not seen coverage of the protests against Babette's feast to get an idea how credible her claims ar but have seen enough of the tactics used at other events that have attracted the sort of protest described by Babette to consider her story credible.

No idea how in practice we can stop the sort of vermin who consider those tactics legitimate though without creating a larger problem.

R0bert

This is rich coming from those that vilify and denigrate homosexuals, lie about abortion, display the vilest elitism, intolerance and bigotry and try to force their backward views on the rest of us.

Just another bunch of extremist godbotherers whining because someone stood up to them and their hate dogma.

Good God, what a self-serving piece of writing.

I think you lost the plot when you decided to describe the protesters of your event 'ferals'. As far as I could tell (one protester perhaps excepted) all the protesters did was to explain the agenda of WCF to people and state they would protest the event. Hardly behaviour all that threatening. I have seen worse behaviour by those picketing abortion clinics.

Robert,
You deal with them like so;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0fFi0j1GMQ
Then you get some friendly hackers or internet snoops to compile a page like this (trigger warning, scantily clad SJW's) and post their personal details, address etc for all the world to see.
http://imgur.com/a/eKSiN
Then, if possible you get them to make an even bigger fool of themselves by explaining their actions, and being narcissists they always rise to the bait:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAddCgWSbTU