Posted on 02/22/2015 10:38:04 AM PST by walford
Ultimately, this is about the government designating an Official Position on a social issue and using force to impose it as a minority on the rest of the population.
When the Civil Rights laws were enacted during the '60s, it was determined that places of "public accommodation" could not discriminate based upon race, sex or age. These are groups into which people are born. Hence, to be permitted access to offer goods and services to the public, they are obligated to offer them to all of the public, regardless of which group one is born into.
And there is no religious accommodation permitted for this. If your religion tells you that one race is inferior or that women are livestock, you may not conduct commerce if everyone is not granted equal access.
There is no controversy or disagreement about being born female, black or getting old.
There is indeed as to whether one is born, chooses or is led by dysfunction into the various sexual preferences currently exhibited in our society. Certainly psychological disorder -- and even lack of character -- can have a genetic element, but it is not proof that sexual behaviors fall into the same category of race, sex or age.
Offering no scientific evidence showing otherwise, a minority that has influence far beyond its numbers is increasingly imposing its will upon the minority to make it so what one does in bed and with whom one does it is to be legally considered a demographic group that must be accommodated in the same way as those into which there is no argument that one is born.
These people can get their cakes made or their flowers delivered by a company that would have no problem accommodating them, but they are deliberately seeking out those who would object upon personal, moral, and/or religious grounds so they can have their value system -- or lack thereof -- rammed down all of our throats using the coercive power of government.
The ultimate object is to have the minority marginalize the majority in the pursuit of transforming society into an Utopia in which the Laws of Nature are trumped by how a very few wish and hope things can and should be.
Part of this is to transform the primary purpose of reproductive organs into those of pleasure, and babies are to be regarded and treated as STDs. Hence, Westerners are building more coffins than cradles as we blithely indulge our fleeting sexual desires with no sense of obligation to the world we leave behind.
If our prehistoric ancestors had such a mindset, we would not be here.
The problem is, Nature ultimately has Her way, so if we institutionalize mores that are in conflict with survival, we will find ourselves replaced by those who do not share our perspectives with respect to freedom for all based upon race, sex or religion.
And the perpetrators of this atrocity will be the first to go once an infantile culture that comports more with Natural Laws supplants the juvenile mindset that dominates our culture today.
Anyone who would attempt a mature, analytical discussion of the logical conclusion of our present choices -- citing principles that transcend time and place -- are smeared as being backward, stupid and even mentally ill.
Meanwhile, the ship of Western Civilization continues to sink.
After due consideration, I have come to believe that any anti-discrimination laws are violations of natural law. If people are compelled to serve people they do not wish to server, then their freedom is being violated.
It is not the government's business to attempt to impose tolerance morality on others. Let the community and the market forces teach people the errors of their ways, not a government fist.
Re: Wedding cakes. This isn’t new but someone asked if a Jewish baker would have to bake a cake for an ex SS officer with decorations commemorating the death of 6 million Jews. Of course not. However, it’s obvious we’re entering new territory. But the law is what 5 Supreme Court justices say it is. Increasingly we’re moving toward nomiocracy, rule by lawyers.
And this is what I have come around to believing too. We all know it was done in a good cause, but it appears to me that it is a blatant violation of the rights of individuals to exercise their own freedoms.
It is the forceable imposition of government approved and government dictated morality.
Actually, yeah.
BTW, TMI.
My property, my rules.
The market can decide whether I’m right or wrong.
BTW—What just compensation has the lady in question been given by the state government which is dictating how she runs her business?
“What just compensation has the lady in question been given by the state government which is dictating how she runs her business?”
It’s the same thing with the Boy Scouts; they could form their own organization for young boys that has homosexual leaders, but instead they insist upon forcing other people to have their kids led by homosexuals as well.
Such is the “choice” advocated by the True Believers of the Secular Humanist Left.
Please refer to Denny's "racist" problems for the reason why.
Maybe not, but this war must become personal, as in reaching out and actually touching someone. Sue them, picket them, photograph them, protest outside their homes, and publicize the judges who give them a walk, with the same treatment as the dirtbags. Your suggestions are always welcome, too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.