Posted on 08/26/2012 5:22:38 AM PDT by scottjewell
Coming soon to a church near you...
From your lips to God's ear. Surely that's their next target isn't it?
There is one thing very different here. Black people are not doing anything wrong and should be treated as anybody else. Homosexuals are people doing something wrong. You have no moral obligation to serve them at all. People who include homosexuals as a minority are twisting things way out of proportion.
My son is the assistant pastor at a small, non-denominational, evangelical church and they are VERY concerned about this. They know in this day and age that they could lose a court case and be forced to perform such weddings.
How about PRIVATE BUSINESS instead of PUBLIC business?
Every church in the US will be forced to perform “gay marriages” or lose tax exempt status. They will argue it’s analogous to interracial marriage and if it’s a legal marriage denying it is illegal.
They’ll also try to make any questioning any of the homosexual “hate speech.”. Someone in Canada has already been convicted of quoting the Bible on the topic as a human rights violation.
It would be a nice start, to have a push-back from all of this, which would call for a renewal of liberty in the private sphere, and the importance of such.
Is there not a single social-conservative billionaire willing to put up megabucks to defeat the ACLU in these cases? If not, they will continue to bully small businesses across the land, using the disgraceful legal system with which we are infected: legal costs unaffordable, and loser never pays.
I am not saying that homosexuals are Samsung products, nor am I saying that homosexuals are dogs. I'm just choosing who or what I want at my establishment.
If a business chooses not to serve blacks or homosexuals, the business is not necessarily seeing homosexuals or blacks in a similar way or equating the two groups. I see blacks and homosexuals as two very different collections of humans. But, if I wanted to ban one or both from my lunch counter, I think I should have that right as a property owner.
BS it is exactly the very same premise. The government is forcing you and your business weather you want too or not. In addition to that the same government that is forcing businesses to 'not discriminate' is also the very same government that encourages, allows and protects the likes of the Black Caucus, affirmative action and a whole host of discriminatory race based policies, laws and politics.
Resturaunts and bars are consdered public and subject to smoking bans. I think if I own a bar I should be able to post a sign saying that it is a smoking establishment and if people don’t like smoke they don’t have to come in.
Yeah, make it part of the reception contract that the attendees understand that a certain percentage of all profits get donated to pro-family causes. HA!
Oh yeah, and I forgot to mention that this is merely the next logical liberal step of “You didn’t build that!” being “You don’t own that!”
In totally unrelated news, many couples looking for a venue for their weddings are finding the selection sparse.
Kate and Ming wished to hold their wedding ceremony at a Buddhist retreat in Vermont and have their reception at a nearby inn.
Oh, so Kate and Ming get to be selective based on their religious beliefs -- they chose a Buddhist retreat -- but the Christian inn owners have no such right.
Yes, it is the height of hypocrisy.
OBVIOUSLY the dykes were seeking to squelch the religious and secular business practices of some really good people who are believers. Conspicuous believers who exercise their First Amendment rights.
I would pursue this. A good PI could find that these two went out of their way to target this institution for the purposes of humiliating them and denying them their First Amendment rights to free religious practice AS THEY SEE IT.
Countersue, get damages and punitives, which for this place, and their good will, and for what they stand for, could easily be several millions.
Alan Dershowitz, where are you?
THIS SHOULD NOT BE THE END OF THE STORY.
And effectively be compelled to recognize "gay" as a protected class. The subsequent step will be when a gay preacher/pastor/minister/teacher is denied a position at a school or (gulp) a church. The next thing you see is a preacher at the pulpit sporting a moustache and a dress. Churches will be ripped apart.
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.