Some moderate folks say you cannot use the marginal examples of true absurdity to show the ridiculous positions of liberal ideologues.   I disagree, it is exactly by showing specific actions that such entrenched progressives take that a person begins to understand their ultimate objective.   Below is a real world example (emphasis mine).   This really happened.  The progressive anti-church liberals actually put all of this effort, time, money (your money), energy and human capital into action with profound forethought and specific intent to get closer to their goal.
September 19, 2011, the federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco unanimously rejected a fair housing advocacy group’s religious discrimination lawsuit against the Boise, Idaho Rescue Mission, a Christian organization dedicated to serving the poor needy, and homeless in Boise, Idaho.  The court ruling offers valuable protection to religious shelters across the country.
In 2008 the Boise Rescue Mission was sued by the Intermountain Fair Housing Council, a federally funded fair housing activist group, over two of the Mission’s ministries: a homeless shelter for men, and a Christian discipleship program for women recovering from substance abuse. Guests of the two ministries alleged that the Rescue Mission engaged in unlawful religious discrimination by encouraging attendance at chapel services at the homeless shelter and by requesting members of the discipleship program to participate in religious activities.
In a unanimous ruling authored by Judge Susan P. Graber, an appointee of President Clinton, the Ninth Circuit rejected all claims. “Our Constitution and civil rights laws protect the right of religious groups to minister to the poor and needy in accordance with their religious beliefs,” said Luke Goodrich, Deputy National Litigation Director at The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. Goodrich argued the case for the Mission at the Ninth Circuit.
Participation in the Rescue Mission’s ministries is completely voluntary and free of charge, and the Mission receives no government funding. By contrast, the Intermountain Fair Housing Council that sued the Rescue Mission received over $874,000 in federal funding from 2008 to 2010 to bring lawsuits like this one.
“Especially in these economic times, it makes no sense for federal taxpayers to subsidize baseless lawsuits against religious ministries who are trying to help the poor. The resources required to defend lawsuits ought to go towards food and shelter for the homeless,” added Goodrich.   (Read Full District Court Ruling Here)

See how ridiculous liberalism is when taken to its logical conclusion?   A privately operated Christian Homeless Shelter provides temporary and transitional food and housing to the homeless.   Yet there actually exists a group of progressive liberals whose primary purpose is to sue such shelters because they encouraged the homeless, “guests”, to attend chapel services as part of their Christian outreach and ministry.   “Encouraged”, not “Required”.
This Church and faith-based charity organization had never cost anyone in the community a dime, not one cent.   Nor had they taken any money from any federal assistance program to operate their shelter or drug rehabilitation facility.   For all intents and purposes this Boise Idaho Church was quietly serving the impoverished and disenfranchised within the community.   Yet, a federally funded ‘advocacy’ group consisting of teams of lawyers took the church and ministry to court for their efforts.  The church spent tens of thousands of dollars defending itself from the onslaught of insane liberalism.
People wonder why any charity would put themselves into this position.   Indeed, the elimination of these faith-based organizations is the primary driving force of liberal progressive ideologues who would rather spend the taxpayer money on dependency, than allow a free faith-based center to teach self-sufficiency.    This demand, and at this point one can only call it a demand, by the progressives to dictate the rules upon which the homeless within society must be helped, is ridiculous; And further evidence of their ideological belief that a governmental control system of communal dependency is the end goal of their ideology.