Posted on 02/23/2014 11:56:52 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Back when gay rights advocates were first pushing for gay marriage, they claimed that they only wanted equality and that no one would be compelled to participate in gay marriage events.
They lied.
As soon as gay marriage went on the books, and in some states where it wasn’t even on the books, religious bakeries and photographers were assaulted with demands that they participate in gay ceremonies, sued if they didn’t and ordered to take part in gay ceremonies or face fines… and even jail time.
States have responded by trying to pass measures that will protect religious freedom and freedom of speech. That means preventing incredible abuses of power by the gay rights lobby like this…
Participate in Gay Wedding… or Go to Jail for a Year
A Colorado bakery owner illegally discriminated against a gay couple when he refused to bake a wedding cake for the pair last year because of his Christian religious beliefs, a judge ruled on Friday.
Phillips is a devoted Christian who has an unwavering faith. She said he is a person of such deep faith that he won’t even bake Halloween-themed treats – at all.
Administrative Law Judge Robert Spencer ordered Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in suburban Denver, to accommodate sex-couples or face fines and other possible penalties.
“The complainants can sue him civilly in the regular courts system or he can potentially be prosecuted by the district attorney for up to twelve months in jail.”
“At first blush, it may seem reasonable that a private business should be able to refuse service to anyone it chooses,” Spencer wrote in his 13-page ruling. “This view, however, fails to take into account the cost to society and the hurt caused to persons who are denied service simply because of who they are.”
No one in this country should be sent to jail for a year because their religious beliefs prevent them from participating in a gay ceremony.
Cases like these should not be happening in a free country. This is about protecting the First Amendment which was here before gay marriage… and will hopefully still exist after gay marriage is done.
The Supreme Court of New Mexico has ruled that Christian photographers do not have the right to decline photographing a gay “wedding,” even if doing so violates their religious beliefs.
The case began in 2006, when Vanessa Willock approached the Albuquerque-based business to take pictures of her ceremony with girlfriend Misti Collinsworth and was politely declined. She found another photographer for the event but pursued legal action anyway.
The Huguenins argued they did not discriminate against homosexuals but “did not want to convey through [Huguenin]’s pictures the story of an event celebrating an understanding of marriage that conflicts with [the owners’] beliefs.”
Cases like these do not belong in America. And the only way to stop them is by reinforcing the First Amendment.
The ACLU took in 63 million dollars in 2011. It has net assets of almost 300 million dollars. Anthony Romero, its Exec Director, takes in 342,858 dollars.
And like most bullies, the ACLU picked a target its own size, Barronelle Stutzman, a 70-year-old woman who runs a flower shop. For those who think that gay marriage can be folded on, the case of Arlene’s Flowers provides another sobering wake-up call.
Homosexual activists are not looking to live and let live. They are out to force their way on everyone else at any cost. Even shamelessly going after a 70-year-old woman who was only following her faith.
The American Civil Liberties Union also stepped into the fray, sending Stutzman a letter announcing it would file a separate civil suit for damages on behalf of the engaged couple unless she agrees to provide flowers without discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation, publish a letter of apology in the newspaper and donate $5,000 to a local youth center, in lieu of attorneys’ fees.
“Your refusal to sell flowers to Mr. Ingersoll and Mr. Freed for their wedding has hurt them very deeply. It is a disturbing reminder of the history of discrimination and disparate treatment that they and other gay men and women have experienced over the years,” ACLU attorney Michael R. Scott said in the letter.
Gay rights activists have responded to these attempts to protect the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights from their assault by crying “Jim Crow.”
Protecting religious freedom is not Jim Crow. It’s the right of people to opt out of a religious ceremony whose premise their religion does not accept. The United States has Separation of Church and State, something that liberals insist upon. It ought to have a separation of Unitarian Church and State as well.
No American should be jailed for a year for not participating in a gay wedding. Any gay rights group that demands this isn’t protecting Jim Crow, it’s attacking the basic civil rights of every traditional American.
Daniel should stop using the word ‘gay’ and use the correct term ‘homosexual’.
Agreed.
Then a non-Muslim doctor would jump in to treat the Christian patient. Like this situation would ever occur in real life, lol (the only doctor in town is a Muslim). Plus if a doctor let their patient die because he or she didn’t like non-Muslims, it would be a violation of the Hippocratic oath and result in the doctor losing his or her medical license. You can’t seriously be equating that scenario with baking a faggot a wedding cake, can you?
Much of this funded by the taxpayer. (10 years old but still relevant). make a good subject to address IF we ever get power back in Congress.
The Constitution was written in English because its authors were native English speakers. Thus, the words in the document are not interpreted by consulting a Spanish - or any other language, of whatever provenance - dictionary. Equally, the Constitution is understood in light of the Declaration of Independence notwithstanding that it is possible, and likely, that there are religions with respect to which the theological implications of the Declaration of Independence are non sequesters. The Constitution mentions the Lordship of Jesus Christ
Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth.because the authors and ratifiers of the Constitution took Christianity for granted as the default in America. Consequently if there is a balance to be struck between Christianity and Buddhism (or shamanism, or anything else) the tie logically goes to Christians. Until and unless a Constitutional Amendment to the contrary is ratified.
Being able to discriminate for any reason is essential for liberty. The only entity that must not be allowed to discriminate is government. Individuals and private groups and businesses must be able to do so, or government will have the power to run our lives.
Personally, I would much rather be treated by my dogs’ veterinarian than by a Christian-hating Muslim.
I think that's actually the ultimate goal. I think all this gay stuff is st a trojan horse, and the rank-stupid narcissistic gays are jumping around in totalitarian bliss never even once realizing that the Leftists don't give a single damn about any of them. Once the laws are in place, they will then be shifted to Muslim interpretations, and those same gays will find themselves being threatened with death by Muslims who will be legally protected by the same laws the gays used against Christian.
I fell like I'm watching millions of people commit suicide, while dancing around singing that they are eliminating death. It's like a freaking Fellini movie.
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.
