Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Commission Opposes T-Shirt Company’s Refusal To Print Gay Pride Message
nomblog.com ^ | 12/03/2012 | n/a

Posted on 12/03/2012 8:22:47 PM PST by massmike

A Kentucky commission has announced its support of a gay and lesbian group suing a T-shirt company owned by a Christian man who declined to print the group’s shirts because the message, he said, violates his faith.

Blaine Adamson, who owns Hands On Originals (HOO) in Lexington, Ky., refused to print T-shirts for the Gay and Lesbian Services Organization (GLSO) in early March, because he disagreed with the “gay pride” message the group wanted printed on the shirts.

“I want the truth to come out — it’s not that we have a sign on the front door that says, ‘No Gays Allowed,’” Adamson said in a video posted on ADF’s website. “We’ll work with anybody. But if there’s a specific message that conflicts with my convictions, then I can’t promote that.”

The text on the shirts would have read: “Lexington Gay Pride,” and would include a list of sponsors of the event on the back of the shirt.

Adamson offered to direct GLSO to another business that could produce the shirts for the same price.

Instead, GLSO filed a complaint on March 28 against HOO with the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Human Rights Commission claiming that HOO violated a local ordinance based on sexual orientation.

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) attorneys filed a response to GLSO’s complaint in April stating its claim of discrimination is unfounded, and that the complaint should be dismissed.

(Excerpt) Read more at nomblog.com ...


TOPICS: Chit/Chat; Society
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda

1 posted on 12/03/2012 8:22:52 PM PST by massmike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: massmike
It’s supposed to be (or was) a free country. The T-shirt company should be able to print, or refuse to print, whatever it wants.
2 posted on 12/03/2012 8:26:38 PM PST by Leaning Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

And there are are no other silk-screening tee-shirt places to print these people message.

Targeted attacks by the 3% (at most) population against any one who oppose their twisted agenda are never pretty.

Their tactic is to drive everyone into submission and compliance with their ideas.

No tolerance for you!!!


3 posted on 12/03/2012 8:29:24 PM PST by KosmicKitty (WARNING: Hormonally crazed woman ahead!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KosmicKitty

You mean they LIED when they said all they wanted was to be left alone?????


4 posted on 12/03/2012 8:31:24 PM PST by massmike (At least no one is wearing a "Ron Paul - 2016" tee shirt........yet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right

If we are not allowed discrimination in our own businesses, much less our individual lives, we are not free.

This anti-discrimination crud has been part of “the rules” for a long time.


5 posted on 12/03/2012 8:40:20 PM PST by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue./Technological progress cannot be legislated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: massmike

From the ‘love that dare not speak its name’” to the “love that won’t shut the hell up”

I am a libertarian, what two consenting adults want to do to in the private is none of my business.

But the flip side is, I don’t have to jump for joy or approve of what they do. And if I don’t want to sell them a tee-shirt, I don’t have to!!

That’s freedom!!


6 posted on 12/03/2012 8:41:29 PM PST by KosmicKitty (WARNING: Hormonally crazed woman ahead!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: massmike
Adamson offered to direct GLSO to another business that could produce the shirts for the same price.

Instead, GLSO filed a complaint on March 28 against HOO with the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Human Rights Commission claiming that HOO violated a local ordinance based on sexual orientation.

Because it never was about t-shirts, but about targeting this man for his unacceptable beliefs. Convert or die (embrace the perversion or have his livelihood destroyed).

7 posted on 12/03/2012 8:45:28 PM PST by Ezekiel (The Obama-nation began with the Inauguration of Desolation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

This is ridiculous.

He should be able to refuse business.


8 posted on 12/03/2012 8:45:37 PM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Pink Nazis.


9 posted on 12/03/2012 8:47:25 PM PST by Gene Eric (Demoralization is a weapon of the enemy. Don't get it, don't spread it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

I’ve always said that KY is more liberal than people think. The especially choose liberals there at the municipal level.


10 posted on 12/03/2012 8:48:39 PM PST by Theodore R. ("Hey, the American people must all be crazy out there!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Somewhere in the FR archives is a story about the persecution of a Christian photographer that refused to service a homosexual event.


11 posted on 12/03/2012 8:51:12 PM PST by Gene Eric (Demoralization is a weapon of the enemy. Don't get it, don't spread it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: massmike

isn’t there a first amendment concerning freedom of the press?????


12 posted on 12/03/2012 9:01:08 PM PST by terycarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.

You may be right about Kentucky, but if the GOP did control the state government then they could and should prevent these type of local ordinances.


13 posted on 12/03/2012 9:12:35 PM PST by Aetius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right

Business owners should, frankly, be able to service anyone they so choose. It’s none of the government’s business who a man does business with so long as it’s legal business, and the refusal to do business shouldn’t matter in the slightest.


14 posted on 12/03/2012 9:22:24 PM PST by CaspersGh0sts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: terycarl

Silly conservatives, the first amendment is for progressives and perverts— when cows fly.


15 posted on 12/03/2012 9:22:53 PM PST by liberalism is suicide (Communism,fascism-no matter how you slice socialism, its still baloney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Are there any groups of Christians seeking GLBTA businesses to print church group T-shirts and Biblical messages? Then put the GLBTA business owners up in front of the commission for refusing to do business with Christians.


16 posted on 12/03/2012 9:26:57 PM PST by tbw2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Sooo....it occurs to me that to avoid these Gestapo rulings and tons of legal and financial hassle, conservative business owners may be better served citing SCHEDULE, when encountering a business order they’d rather not fill.

“Yaa.....we can have those shirts for you....about August 2014. If that meets your needs, we require a 50% deposit.”

Or, cake, or, flowers, or rental accommodations, etc...


17 posted on 12/03/2012 9:42:11 PM PST by G Larry (Which of Obama's policies do you think I'd support if he were white?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Gay pride, i.e., homosexual arrogance.


18 posted on 12/03/2012 9:49:34 PM PST by windsorknot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric

You are correct.
It was a NM case.
The photographer ultimately lost after a very lengthy and expensive legal battle.
These businesses should come to Texas.
We are as free as you can be in the USSA.
Hopefully we will just be trading partners one day.


19 posted on 12/03/2012 10:01:07 PM PST by Clump ( the tree of liberty is withering like a stricken fig tree)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.

Well, it’s more complicated than that. KY is more DEMOCRAT than people think because it has a lot of ignorant antebellum rednecks who will vote for whoever has the D after their name, all the time, no matter what, which gives the actual Democrat politicians that they vote for free reign to be as liberal as they want. The politicians are socially way more liberal than the people who vote for them, but you’re talking about the white equivalent of the black vote: solid Democrat no matter what the issues are or what they actually believe.

I know genuine racist Kentuckians who think gay marriage is evil, who disowned their relative for becoming an atheists, who nevertheless adore Obama. Because he is a Democrat who gives out food stamps. These attitudes go back to FDR and beyond, all the way back to Lincoln.

And I was born and raised in KY, so no complaining about my use of the term “ignorant rednecks.” I calls ‘em like I sees ‘em.


20 posted on 12/03/2012 10:19:17 PM PST by LifeComesFirst (http://rw-rebirth.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Ew, she’s not pretty, she looks like her dad after a shave.

I’m only saying this cuz the article called her a “beauty.”


21 posted on 12/03/2012 10:20:56 PM PST by LifeComesFirst (http://rw-rebirth.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Another targeted setup


22 posted on 12/03/2012 10:27:25 PM PST by HereInTheHeartland (Witty saying goes here...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G Larry
Sooo....it occurs to me that to avoid these Gestapo rulings and tons of legal and financial hassle, conservative business owners may be better served citing SCHEDULE, when encountering a business order they’d rather not fill.

Bingo! That's the way to deal with them! And to grin broadly while doing it!

Regards,

23 posted on 12/03/2012 10:57:44 PM PST by alexander_busek (Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: massmike

I wonder if this so-called “commission” would have ruled the same way had a neo-nazi group wanted a “White Pride” t-shirt printed, and they had refused...

More to the point, I wonder why the attorneys didn’t argue it.

Mark


24 posted on 12/03/2012 11:34:41 PM PST by MarkL (Do I really look like a guy with a plan?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G Larry

I have always said exactly that. Don’t say no, just say yes in terms that are impossible, re timing and cost.


25 posted on 12/04/2012 12:29:15 AM PST by kabumpo (Kabumpo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right

Go to a liberal company with Conservative Pride and see if they turn the customer away. I think that would be a great test.


26 posted on 12/04/2012 2:51:52 AM PST by napscoordinator (GOP Candidate 2020 - "Bloomberg 2020 - We vote for whatever crap the GOP puts in front of us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: massmike

In the 1980s there were plenty of book, record, and poster publishers who rejected printing works they found offensive.

Even now commercial networks will reject some political ads they deem offensive.

The Lavender Mafia is a hysterical bunch of lady men.


27 posted on 12/04/2012 5:43:49 AM PST by a fool in paradise (America 2013 - STUCK ON STUPID)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Should have just quoted a price they couldn’t meet


28 posted on 12/04/2012 10:21:01 AM PST by Figment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KosmicKitty

Hater/s


29 posted on 12/04/2012 10:25:31 AM PST by Figment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: massmike

does this commission have any regulatory authority? if not then why do they even exist and who is paying for it?


30 posted on 12/04/2012 10:33:52 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LifeComesFirst

its about foodstamps, ebt cards, and farm subsidies.

free stuff voters.


31 posted on 12/04/2012 10:42:44 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: massmike
Lexington-Fayette Urban County Human Rights Commission

I think it is time to serious put an effort into disbanding these "human rights commission" things. They are like extra-judicial government entities that make up the rules as they go.

I mean, its sad to say so because there is still real discrimination in the world, and a tightly focused entity for that purpose wouldn't be a bad thing, but clearly there isn't nearly enough anymore, so they have plenty of time to go after businesses for not wanting to participate in the free speech rights of others.

We are very close to re-implementing slavery. Doctors will be forced to treat patients, bakers to make confections for events they oppose, wedding planners to plan weddings they think are immoral, and printers forced to help propagate messages they find offensive.

Meanwhile, if you make a different message shirt, the same government will refuse to let your child wear it to school; and in some cities, they will either prevent you from wearing the shirt, or turn a blind eye when people who dislike it attack you.

32 posted on 12/04/2012 12:04:32 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CaspersGh0sts

Not to disagree with you, but if you substituted “black” for “lesbian”, you’d get very little support for the same statement.

Even people who might actually agree with you would say they didn’t, so ingrained is the culture of non-discrimination when it comes to race. We all “know” that it was wrong to have whites-only seats, to not allow black and white people to date, to have separate water fountains, and make blacks sit on the back of the bus.

So we passed laws making it illegal for a business to discriminate against people based on their race. And ever since then, more and more “classes” of people have fought to expand those laws to cover their “class”.

BTW, the Americans with Disabilities Act is a form of the same mentality — that disabled people shouldn’t be “refused service” by physical barriers to their entry. And again, a solid majority of the country would defend those laws, although not on the margins yet, because people are practical when laws are not.

In this case though, I should think the shirt maker has a very strong case. He isn’t refusing to provide service to the lesbians. He is refusing to put a message on his shirts to sell to them that he disagrees with.

I should think he would also be allowed not to put swear words or offensively suggestive comments on t-shirts as well.


33 posted on 12/04/2012 12:14:47 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: massmike

GAY PRIDE
Two sins at once.


34 posted on 12/04/2012 12:24:21 PM PST by gitmo ( If your theology doesn't become your biography it's useless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike
From the article:

A Kentucky commission has announced its support of a gay and lesbian group suing a T-shirt company owned by a Christian man who declined to print the group’s shirts because the message, he said, violates his faith.

[skip]

Adamson offered to direct GLSO to another business that could produce the shirts for the same price.


And that, FRiends, is what "gay marriage" is all about: Destroy (or attempt to) those who disagree with the homosexual agenda.
35 posted on 12/04/2012 1:11:32 PM PST by Peet (Everything has an end -- only the sausage has two.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

‘BTW, the Americans with Disabilities Act is a form of the same mentality — that disabled people shouldn’t be “refused service” by physical barriers to their entry.’

I’m just waiting for some ACLU type lawyer to sue for the “right” of blind people to drive cars. After all, it’s discrimination not to allow them to do so, right?


36 posted on 12/04/2012 5:45:49 PM PST by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: KosmicKitty

Sadly, most folks(even many who say they are libertarian) do not get that principle. As this story shows, the homosexualist movement is totally in league with the socialist/statist/Rousseau idea of using the government to enforce its worldview upon everyone else.


37 posted on 12/04/2012 5:52:47 PM PST by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson