SIMPLE CONCLUSIONS … ALBEIT UNSATISFACTORY ONES
|| By FITSNEWS || We were excited to read columnist Kathleen Parker‘s take on the dueling liberties debate emanating from Indiana this week … at least until we finished her column.
Sure, Parker gave the discussion a nice recap. She also landed on the correct conclusion: “Discrimination is a two-way street, and tolerance should apply equally to sexual orientation as well as to religious belief.”
No arguing that …
But how do we strike the proper balance? In which instances are the politically correct leftists “right?” And in which instances are the right-wing evangelicals “correct?” Because this is clearly a debate in which circumstantial discernment needs to be our guide.
Aside from exposing the ridiculousness at the fringes of this debate, Parker didn’t provide much in the way of such guidance. So we’re left with the lingering question: In which cases does the liberty of a same sex couple seeking goods and/ or services outweigh the liberty of a citizen looking to faithfully uphold his or her religions beliefs? Or put another way: In which cases should private sector transactions be subject to the laws of discrimination?
We’ve got several thoughts … unfortunately none of them lead us to a satisfactory resolution.
But in an effort to move things down the road a bit, here are those thoughts (in an attempted order of importance) …
1. No business should discriminate … no matter what one believes, the provision of goods and services by any business should be colorblind, gender-neutral and utterly indifferent to the religion or sexual orientation of its customers. Or any other factor. At least that’s what we believe. In our view, the only “discriminating” factor in the free market – ever – should be the ability of the buyer to pay the seller’s price. Obviously this pure free market ideal – which is how we conduct all of our business – is not agreed upon by millions of people across the country (for whatever reason). Which is why we are having this discussion …
2. No government entity should ever discriminate … as we’ve repeatedly stated, we believe government should perform a very narrow set of “core functions” (cops, courts, jails, roads, bridges, etc.). In pursuit of those core functions, we believe there is a fundamental (and constitutional) obligation to protect against all forms of discrimination. This is why in addition to the fair and even-handed disbursement of justice (and government services), we have always supported same-sex civil unions as well as equal pay for female workers. Government simply cannot discriminate – not without violating the Fourteenth Amendment, anyway.
3. The gay marriage debate is simple (and separate from this discussion) … as we’ve also repeatedly stated, the gay marriage debate has become needlessly complicated by government. We’ve said it before and we’ll say it again: Government should have nothing to do with either the sanctioning or banning of marriage – gay, straight or plural. Those decisions must be left to individual congregations – free from state compulsion one way or the other. Also, given its status as a religious institution and not a financial transaction, we should separate the marriage issue from this debate entirely.
4. Liberties must be balanced … now we arrive at the crux of the issue. In assessing private sector transactions and interactions, in which situations do businesses and citizens have the right to discriminate? Because let’s be honest: There are situations in which discrimination should be permitted. And not just to safeguard religious liberty, but to protect economic liberty as well. Protecting the right of businesses to refuse service has to be part of our free market framework on some level, even if we personally do not agree with it when it’s for discriminatory reasons (a.k.a. our first point).
So … where does that leave us?
As unsatisfying as it may be, we are back to the notion of circumstantial discernment. The merits of particular cases.
Think of it like this: We’ve already established that government is constitutionally forbidden from discriminating. And we’ve established that there must be a balance of liberty within the private sector – including the right to discriminate. All that’s left? Figuring out where (and how) the lines must be drawn.
Obviously a hospital emergency room isn’t the same as a florist … just as a dentist’s office is different that a restaurant. Heating and air repairmen aren’t the same as utilities which power their machines. And attorneys and used car salesman are … okay, there are some similarities there, we’ll grant you.
Bottom line? Each transaction has to be assessed based on the competing rights at stake – which puts added pressure on our judiciary to be fairer (i.e. blinder) than ever.
144 comments
The left in America believes it has the right to Bully everyone else into following the lifestyle and dictates of its political special interests…
Christians have rights. The more the left tries to deny us our rights…the worse off you will end up being for the over-reaching liberals and the Democrat Party…
The BACKLASH is coming…and it will be HARSH. You have angered too many DECENT Americans..who tried to be nice to you…
Obama has only a short time left. And ALL the Bull-S#!t he has forced on us…WILL BE UN-DONE. Any Republican who gets elected MUST promise, and then attack Obama’s impositions on our freedoms….
The backlash is coming, all right. You’ll just be on the wrong end of it.
Corrupt judges are doing the bidding AGAINST the people. 70% were against redefining marriage for homosexuals… You FORCED it anyway…
You live in a media-fed La-la land of Bul$#!t…it will not hold up over time…The people will win…your dictator will be a horrible memory soon…and we’ll elect a president w/ the guts to thwart your damage to our nation…
Actually the latest polls show 63% of Americans believe states should allow same sex marriage. Your stats are about 10 years old. The people have spoken. Why do you hate Americans so much?
When we voted, you ignorant F*#k…the people opposed it in South Carolina at almost 70%….but corrupt activist judges over-rode the will of the people…
Even California voted down redefining government-recognized marriage to include the small subset of homosexuals…
You can make your media polls show anything you want. If we voted in SC again…you may get your A$$#$ kicked even worse…Dumb@$$…
The Indiana Star is reporting that new LGBT anti-discrimination language will be added to the state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act. This would make it so that business would not be able to discriminate against LGBT people under the law. The bill would still allow non-profit groups and churches to discriminate against LGBT people.
The Democrat Party is all about CONTROL…You are allowed to HATE Christians…but you want everyone to be FORCED to exalt your lifestyle…
I don’t care what you do…but to MAKE other people acknowledge as a virtue, what you do as a sexual proclivity is NAZI-like….
I make the distinction where your service provided “might” imply endorsement of something that would violate your religious beliefs.
A birthday cake for a gay couple wouldn’t violate any beliefs. A wedding or anniversary cake “might”.
Once prostitution is legalized, would Will be able to turn away male gay customers?
Ha! Love this comment/question.
“Once prostitution is legalized, would Will be able to turn away male gay customers? ”
What makes you think that gay males would want Will’s services?
I know every straight male thinks that every gay male (and every straight woman) has the hots for them – trust me, it ain’t so!
Well, in Will’s case it would be purely theoretical.
They like me, a surprising number of them, anyway. Not hustlers, I mean just regular gay guys — young, old, and in between. Much as I get “accused” of being gay, no such luck for me. And I say that because, if I were, I’d get lucky a hell of a lot more often. ;)
“And I say that because, if I were, I’d sure get lucky a hell of a lot more often. ;)”
Now that’s funny but I’ll bet you get luckier than you admit!
You’d lose the bet. It generally takes me 5 years to get over a relationship. It did with my ex-wife. The girlfriend I had subsequently … well, so far, it’s taken 8. But … I’m ready for the right one. Not really one to be promiscuous, haven’t been that way since the ’80s. I do have chances to be, but maybe it’s the fact that so many of the ones that want to hook up with me are often extremely dangerous. A “mob wife” out on the town. Rejected girlfriend of a truly bad-ass biker. Alcoholics who only want to do it when they’re drunk — and I really don’t care for drunk people at all. You get the idea.
lulz!
It’s a simple fix: end the idea that corporations ( or LLCs, PAs, partnerships or any other legal fictions) are “people” for religious purposes. Make clear that once one opts for the limits on personal liability afforded by these vehicles one has given up the right to raise religious grounds for one’s actions. THAT, my friend, is the free-market solution.
Citizens United: companies are people.
Hobby Lobby: closely held company can have religion.
Both incredibly stupid decisions with untold unintended consequences. BTW, Citizens United held money is speech.
money is speech
——-
Republican.
Ask Georgie Soros…how many elections has that dude bought?
False equality.
It’s as if you think that God and Satan deserve equal time.
Citizens United was an expansion of the principle of
Corporate personhood
Wikipedia
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood
One day, in the not too distant future, both of those rulings will be overturned.
As easily as the Male Catholic Five on the current US supreme court have overridden decades old precedents, a reconstituted court will come along to laugh at theirs
No shit. The Supremes really fucked that one up.
Exactly! Corporations are not people, money is not speech.
.
When did Jesus become a Hater? .
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Why do the haters own Jesus? .
.
When did it become Ok to hate Christians?
Freedom of religion. Some religions hate Christians. So should owners of businesses whose religion hates Christians be allowed to discriminate against Christians?
What does hate have to do with this debate? If a Jewish business doesn’t want to cater a Christmas event, that is not hateful.
“What does hate have to do with this debate? If a Jewish business doesn’t want to cater a Christmas event, that is not hateful.”
Where does it end? Where do we draw the line?
Exactly! If a devout Jewish Caterer believes catering a Christmas event would violate his religious beliefs, then he should not be mandated to do so.
“Exactly!”
Let’s segregate ourselves by race and religion and sexual orientation. What a great America!
Calm down Honey.
You should study up on the Jewish religion. There are strict rules about certain foods. I am not Jewish but have a great respect for the Jewish faith. Even saying “Merry Christmas” violates the core beliefs of some Jews.
“Calm down Honey.”
LOL Honey, I don’t need to do anything – you go and tell your children what they should and shouldn’t do. Who said that Jews had to say “Merry Christmas”? Your posts are wackier and wackier.
Ok then. Just keep spewing hate and anger. Reason and logic went seems to have left you.
“Ok then. Just keep spewing hate and anger. Reason and logic went seems to have left you.”
Ok Miss Holier Than Thou – I don’t need you to tell me what I should and shouldn’t do – and the comment about I should “study up on the Jewish religion” is hilarious – don’t need to study up, I can just ask my husband!
Great. Then ask him. Is he Reformed or Orthodox?
You’d prefer to have forced relationships with people you don’t like?
What if you weren’t allowed to pick your own friends? Or you were forced to date straight people?
You voluntarily segregate yourself every day, you just don’t recognize it.
First, the vast majority of Christians are going to provide gays the same services they provide any one else.
There have always been cases of conflicting rights.
If I could get you to agree that a line should be placed somewhere, then I would agree to placing it in a place favorable to gays.
Old, very bigoted joke my dad and his buddies loved…
What do all the Jewish store owners do after their Xmas sales have been tallied? Gather together and sing “What a friend we have in Jesus”.
“When did it become Ok to hate Christians?”
I don’t hate Christians – why do they hate me?
I don’t hate you or condemn you. I believe we need to leave a little space for those who disagree to act on their beliefs. It’s called freedom and tolerance.
” It’s called freedom and tolerance.”
I practice freedom and tolerance. Why can’t Christians do the same?
It’s one thing to practice tolerance. It is totally different to compel it.
” It is totally different to compel it.”
You are the one who brought up “freedom and tolerance” – if no one wants to practice freedom and tolerance where does that leave us? It would be nice not to have to compel folks to practice freedom and tolerance but there are just some people . . . .
I also practice driving on the correct side of the road in my car. Should we not compel folks to do that either?
It would be nice not to have to compel folks to practice freedom and tolerance but there are just some people . . . .
*Lightbulb goes off*
SCBlues is “W”.
“I’ve abandoned free market principles to save the free market …”
Hmmmm….how many gov’ts have compelled people to “do the right thing” outside of common or natural law?
There’s absolutely no consideration of the past atrocities committed under such a guise…and no reflection on the possibility that when you give an immoral gov’t the ability to regulate morality that one day they might regulate such in a manner that is displeasing to your sensibilities…but because you’ve endorsed it in other areas you’ve in essence fucked yourself(and not in a pleasurable way, more like in a dry and rough manner)
The very same argument is used in some Muslim governments overseas to round up and kill homosexuals.
The National Socialists of Germany also used the same argument to kill homosexuals.
Allowing an immoral gov’t to decides what is and isn’t “moral” outside of a very basic and well defined criteria, like physical harm to person and/or property is pure insanity.
Around 33 A.D. with the Romans.
“And we’ve established that there must be a balance of liberty within the private sector”
You have? lol
“balance of liberty” in the private sector means, “not complete freedom”
If you make the bar for said freedom anything other than restriction against the harm of a person and/or property than you’ll always be subject to the tyranny of the majority….and at some point is time likely to be forced to do something you don’t agree with because the “majority” says so…
That’s not freedom.
Private industry involved in any non-essential service (i.e. not medical services, utilities, etc) should be able to reject any transaction for any or no reason. I agree it’s pretty dumb for business to do that, but they should be free to do as they wish, If their business fails because of it, that’s on them.
“Private industry involved in any non-essential service (i.e. not medical services, utilities, etc) should be able to reject any transaction for any or no reason”
Totally un-American. We as a country and as a society have decided that we do not want to function that way.
Totally un-American.
People should be free to believe and act in ways that may be considered “un-American”. Or would you prefer to return to the days when we actually had a House Un-American Activities Committee whose job was to root out and investigate these matters?
“Or would you prefer to return to the days when we actually had a House Un-American Activities Committee whose job was to root out and investigate these matters?”
And it is quite obvious what you would prefer to return to – but our country settled that and moved on – why can’t you? Perhaps those that want to be un-American should find a new country . . .
You deliberately misconstrued major-major. Obviously he doesn’t want to return to those days.
“You deliberately misconstrued major-major. Obviously he doesn’t want to return to those days.”
And how would you know that? And yet you do not think that he misconstrued me. Your bias is blaring.
Perhaps you are right. It wasn’t deliberate. Maybe you were just being ignorant.
“Perhaps you are right. It wasn’t deliberate. Maybe you were just being ignorant.”
Ah – there we go – and mighty Christian of you too!
So, the Maurice Bessinger’s of the world were within their natural rights saying that they didn’t want blacks eating within their restaurants? Certainly, it was Bessinger’s right to feel and belive it, but the law was clear that his right to exercise it in practice was proscribed.
Of course, he could still freely offer all of those lovely tracts giving “Biblical” basis for his beliefs.
So we are back to black people can’t sit at the lunch counter. Right?
I was about to say the same thing. That is apparently what Fits believes…..
“Protecting the right of businesses to refuse service has to be part of our free market framework on some level”
It’s what Rand Paul has espoused. Perhaps not in practice, but philosophically.
Your analogy is incorrect. Black folks were discriminated against because of their appearance (skin color). Gay people are being discriminated against because of their lifestyle. What if a 20 year old girl drags an extremely wealthy 88 year old man who is clearly senile into a bakery and asks for a cake for the upcoming wedding? Wouldn’t you feel a bit squeamish about taking part in that?
You obviously failed to read the post I was responding to.
Okay. This Mom is flattered that you want her opinion. ;)
I agree with your post that any non-essential service should be able to reject any transaction for any or no reason. There are fine restaurants that turn pp away bc they do not have the required “coat and tie” (It has happened to me). Recently, my husband and I were met at the entrance a fast food restaurant by the manager bc and I’m sure he was going to ask us to leave. You see it was late at night, my husband had on old gym clothes, hadn’t shaved and had a blanket over him bc he was cold and wet (it was raining). Honestly, he looked like a homeless person! Once we explained our situation to the manager, he understood and let us in. I honestly believe he was trying to protect his customers and staff from trouble.
How is that remotely a response to my comment? The post I was responding to stated that a business should be allowed to refuse service to anyone they wanted to, for any reason.
My point was if a business can refuse to sell goods or services to anyone for any reason, then we are back to no blacks at the lunch counter. Obviously from your post you think that would be ok.
Why would a restaurant ban blacks from the lunch counter? IF this happened, the business owner would lose money. A LOT of money.
I would like for you to think about my friend who owns a jewelry store. She has been robbed twice recently which were terrifying experiences, to say the least. So she had a doorbell buzzer installed. To get in, one must ring the bell and she presses the buzzer to unlock the door. Do you think she should be required to let in 3 young men dressed like gangsters? Well she does. And when she does, I hand her back the earrings I was going to buy and dart out the door.
And Yes I do think that a small business should be allowed to refuse service to anyone for any reason. This is not 1960 – we would not be back to no blacks at the lunch counter.
” Wouldn’t you feel a bit squeamish about taking part in that?”
What makes me squeamish is that you’d probably pass the same judgment on a 20 year old girl accompanying her 88 year old grandfather into a bakery to buy a cake for the surprise anniversary party that granddaughter and grandfather are planning for grandmother – such a shame that Christian busy-bodies are always on high-alert and have their imaginations working overtime looking for folks to pass judgment on . . . .
As a baker, I think I would catch on when they said to write on the cake, “Happy Anniversary”. And am not a busybody. Because of my own experience, I have seen Alzheimer’s patients being taken advantage of. Just the other day, I saw confused looking elderly man meandering down the sidewalk. When I stopped to ask if he was ok, it was apparent he had slipped out of a facility just down the road. I hope someone would do the same for my parent whether escaping from a dementia facility or saving them from a gold digger trying to get married.
” I hope someone would do the same for my parent whether escaping from a dementia facility or saving them from a gold digger trying to get married.”
Uh-huh. You have gone so far off track on this thread that it is ridiculous.
This post is about private sector liberties. Having discourse using real world analogies is a logical way to defend one’s point. You should try it, it’s fun,
The idea that there is any equivalence between discriminatory anti-gay laws and religious freedom is absurd. Religious freedom is enshrined in the Constitution. No one is threatening it anywhere in America. Any pretense of a threat is a “straw man” to rationalize discrimination. I’ve said here before: Religious people and institutions dominate American life and our politics. No politician of either party dare be perceived as irreligious. Republicans are exploiting these unwarranted “religious freedom” laws to rile up their credulous voters in the run up to their primaries. This is just politics.
Of course,all that happened in Indiana is that some Right Wing Republicans thought they would try to make some brownie points with some ChristianRightists by passing an unneeded and unnecessary law to appeal to their anger and latent bigotry.
Unfortunately,for them, they got called on it.
Only really good thing to come out of this is that mealy mouthed Right Wing babbler Mike Pence is left looking like a fool and his presidential ambitions(which basically existed in his mind) are now gone forever.
Say Goodnight Mike.
So it’s okay that the pizza makers are now in hiding due to death threats? Is that how the new fascists deal with those who disagree with their “choices”?
“Is that how the new fascists deal with those who disagree with their “choices”? ”
You mean like the right-wing fanatics that bomb abortion clinics and murder doctors while the doctor is in his place of worship?
Exactly! Now you understand.
“Exactly! Now you understand.”
The pizza makers were bombed and then murdered while attending church? Please provide a link.
And sorry I am so ignorant – guess you have to be a good Christian to be so smart, huh?
I, as a Christian, find it abhorant that pp calling themselves “Christians” bomb abortion clinics and murder docs while in church. This action is much worse that simply refusing to bake a cake for someone.
*abhorrent
“This action is much worse that simply refusing to bake a cake for someone.”
You are actually trying to equate murder with cake baking?
Keep in mind that while the left (and their media buds) continue to make a really big deal of the abortion doc murders (obviously deplorable and in no way acceptable) by the Army of God and their ilk, they neglect to mention that we’re essentially talking about three major attacks (two successful, one not so much) since the 1990’s. Throw in another handful of arson cases over the same 20 year period and the stats still add up to abortion docs being much more likely to die from a falling object than some right wing nut. The game, of course, is to tie that tiny sliver of far-right nutties to the much more mainstream desire of some business owners to retain some ability to choose (on religious grounds) with whom they do business.
“Throw in another handful of arson cases over the same 20 year period and the stats still add up to abortion docs being much more likely to die from a falling object than some right wing nut”
I am sure the late Dr. George Tiller’s family finds that comforting. Thanks, Mike!
Holy…mother…of…obsession, Batman!
You so obviously missed every point in your weird, exposed-nerve series of responses that I really don’t know where to begin. The “game” I was discussing was obviously being played on the level of the national discussion; this little blog (while pretty entertaining) doesn’t generate much in the way of nat’l media interest. I’m not sure how you jumped from my absolutely correct and verifiable stats on abortion attacks (I teach terrorism and consult on it for a living, by the way) to some wacky shit about the weirdos at Fox news (God bless ’em) and the Germanwings story. Even though you wandered into that story by veering off the reservation, let me tell how thoroughly you missed that point too…it’s not about the individual plane crash. If random nutjobs and terrorists could manage to even bring down 4 or 5 aircraft annually for a year or three, the aviation industry (as we now know it) would cease to exist. Business travel would suck, far flung tourist locales would suddenly suck, and it would suck pretty hard for the economy overall. Anyway, back to abortion and your fixation with Christian terrs versus gay terrs…
Why would Dr. Tiller’s family be trying to find comfort in hard statistics? As I clearly stated, his murder was a stupid, senseless, and horrible act. Living in a reality-based environment is not that hard, though, so I can still manage to interpret statistics related to his death while acknowledging that. To this day, I occasionally tick off helicopter mommies at speaking engagements when I clearly demonstrate to them (with pesky ol’ facts) that the creepy guy in the old van is NOT what will likely kill their kids. Other kids piled into their kid’s car with them is what will kill their kids, but that’s much less sexy, and I guess telling teens not to talk to strangers is easier than putting a foot down and not letting them roll around screaming at each other, texting, and carrying on at 60 mph.
Anyway, the bottom line remains- there is no army of right wing nutties out wacking abortion docs. Never was, and probably never will be. Likewise, gay terror (while it exists) is an even smaller sliver of the statistical pie. That’s all.
Holy mother of narcissism – you’re an idiot, Mike – an idiot who think he’s brilliant.
Teach terrorism and consult on it for a living?? LOL
Now that’s the stunning level of intellect we’ve come to expect from you. Facts and logic just aren’t your thing; no biggie, you share that problem with many others. Stick to vitriol, fixation, and trolling. THOSE you’re good at.
Maybe she should just get a hobby. Gardening and Birding might calm her nerves.
“Maybe she should just get a hobby. Gardening and Birding might calm her nerves.”
Maybe you should get a life and stop being such a busy body and worrying about what everyone else is doing and sitting in judgment of them.
Did you just tell someone not to judge other folks on here? Wow.
“Did you just tell someone not to judge other folks on here? Wow”
Yes, sir I sure did. Wow
Irony, thy name is SCBlues…
LOL Your shtick is so old, Mike. If you were not so full of yourself you might be able to figure it out – but that will never happen – Narcissistic Personality Disorder is rarely successfully treated and you are the most classic case that I have ever come across.
Narcissistic = Knuckleheads who truly believe they can clinically diagnose people via the interwebs, when in fact they are just angered by logic (which trumps emotion almost every time).
How many dozens of mirrors are in your house, Mike? And are you looking in one now?
Oh, okay…you’re out of facts AND you’re a “last word” type. Gotcha. You call me another name and then I’ll go away and you can feel better about yourself. I’ll spare you all of the psychobabble about angry people and self esteem (I try not diagnose people, even trolls, over the web). Feeding trolls is time consuming, so you win!
“The game, of course, is to tie that tiny sliver of far-right nutties to the much more mainstream desire of some business owners to retain some ability to choose (on religious grounds) with whom they do business”
If you follow the thread, the “game” was started by someone else speaking about pizza makers receiving death threats. The only two folks on this thread trying to link murder with the right of someone to refuse to do business with another are YOU and MOM. But don’t let that stop you – and I’m sure it won’t – and of course you’ll not admit you were in error either. Par for the course.
SCBlues – Your reading comprehension is sub par.
“SCBlues – Your reading comprehension is sub par”
You’ve not posted anything that makes a lick of sense – but don’t let that stop you. It has actually been kind of fun – Jews being forced to say Merry Christmas – senile old men escaping from homes to marry 20 somethings (Taylor?) – bakers and butchers and candlestick makers (Okay I exaggerated that one a little but I’m sure the butcher and candlestick maker can be worked in to this somehow!) – girls in miniskirts – what’s next, Mom? Anyway, Happy Easter!
haha! I have to admit you have a funny way of twisting my words. But I am lmao!
“Keep in mind that while the left (and their media buds) continue to make a really big deal of the abortion doc murders (obviously deplorable and in no way acceptable) by the Army of God and their ilk, they neglect to mention that we’re essentially talking about three major attacks (two successful, one not so much) since the 1990’s. ”
My media buds over at Fox spent almost the entire night recently reporting on and making a big deal out of that Germanwings plane crash when everyone knows that airplane travel is the safest way to go. Shoot – throw in another handful of plane crashes over a 20 year period and the stats still add up that you’d be more likely to die from some right wing nut falling out of the sky and killing you than you would from a plane crash. Damn that Fox news making such a big deal out of that plane crash and frightening folks for no reason whatsoever.
Just like that homosexual terrorist who attempted to murder the entire staff of the Family Research Council…but begged for mercy when the courageous African American guard–who had been shot 3 times–restrained the terrorist. ..The homosexual terrorist chose his target from the SPLC website. ..Does this mean the SPLC is a hate group?
“Does this mean the SPLC is a hate group?”
No it means that the Family Research Council is a hate group. (I actually do not even know what you’re talking about or what your point is but just thought I’d toss that out there to sort of keep things going.)
And thank the good lord that there are no heterosexual terrorists! LOL
Remember the terrorist who planned to methodically gun down every member of the Family Research Council and place a Chick Filet sandwich by their corpse? ( Then again. DAILY Kos and the Huff Post and the MSM spiked the story, so your ignorance of it is hardly surprising…
“Remember the terrorist who planned to methodically gun down every member of the Family Research Council and place a Chick Filet sandwich by their corpse? ”
Was it the spicy chicken sandwich or the grilled chicken sandwich? Since it was beside a corpse shouldn’t it have been a wrap?
Draw the line using “men with guns.”
I’m going to have a black bakery owner make me my Klan party cake.
He’s going to make it with a big frosted oak tree in the middle with nooses hanging from its limbs.
If he doesn’t make it, I’m suing his ass for discrimination.
“If he doesn’t make it, I’m suing his ass for discrimination.”
Fuck the courts! Lynch the niggger!
The thought police are on my side, they’ll lynch him for me.
“The thought police are on my side, they’ll lynch him for me.”
If you’re so chicken-shit that you have to hide under that sheet at least do your own lynching!
Why? That’s what the courts are for! No discrimination allowed!
Truth, justice, and the American way!
You must be a Republican.
Nope, Dixiecrat.
I’m sure your commitment to Jesus is legendary.
Let’s just say, me & Jesus are buds. Plus he mows the lawn cheap.
At least you haven’t ceded the moral high ground.
What do you mean? He mows my hills too.
“I’m going to have a black bakery owner make me my Klan party cake”
And what respectable Klan member would even eat a cake made by a nigger? You must be Faux-Klan.
What respectable gay person would eat a cake made by a fag hating hetero?
“What respectable gay person would eat a cake made by a fag hating hetero?”
Depends on how hunky the fag hating hetero baker is . . . .
lol…now that’s funny.
“[N]o matter what one believes, the provision of goods and services by any business should be colorblind, gender-neutral and utterly indifferent to the religion or sexual orientation of its customers. Or any other factor.”
But we must also balance liberties….ok, got it!
“Balancing” means both sides are giving a little ground. It means both sides are tolerating a little discrimination of the other. This is foolish.
The “free market” inherently discriminates. Yes, government should absolutely refrain from discriminating. However, private discrimination is what allows the “market forces” to work and influence the market. If there is no discrimination (as we are defining it in this context) then we are in complete socialism. Let me be clear, this version of discrimination is refraining from something, or abstaining from action. It is not the type of discrimination where someone takes an affirmative action to discriminate.
This famous pizza place (you know because lots of weddings cater pizza) that has activists shouting and boycotting and threatening to burn down the join—they are discriminating against the religious person. This is the same form of discrimination. It’s making a selection of one thing over another based upon some belief or characteristic of another. This selection is affecting the market. This pizza place is being affected by the market overwhelmingly saying they don’t want to support a pizza place.
The law is clear that a doctor or pharmacist can elect to not prescribe a morning after pill if their religion is against abortion (albeit so long as several factors are weighed, namely that it is not a dire emergency, or that there are adequate local alternatives). I don’t see how this is any different, generally.
Pizza at a wedding reception is a disgusting thought! YUCK!
Haha. I wish I only paid for a value similar to pizza at my wedding reception. What we paid was way more than the price of pizza.!
So will the government now compel homosexual chefs to bake cakes for the likes of Westboro Baptist Church functions? Will Muslim restaurants be forced to serve bacon? Will African Americans be forced to work for racist groups like LA Raza and the Klan? Does freedom require fascism? I don’t suppose. ..
I own a small business and I contract out much of the work. Without revealing who I am, let me just say one of my favorite contractors rejectied one project because the advertisements portrays young women in skirts that are too short by his standards. You see he is a evangelical Christian and obviously has higher standards than I do. Bottom line: He wouldn’t take my business because of his strict religious views.
So, what if he had said I can’t do your work because the ad has black men holding hands with white women?
I would most likely not hire him again, assuming I could find a replacement. My reason would not have anything to do with the fact that he appears to be racist. My reason would be because I have to turn around jobs quickly and frankly don’t have time or patience to deal with him.
Probably not the answer you were hoping for. It’s just the honest truth.
“You see he is a evangelical Christian and obviously has higher standards than I do. ”
Higher standards? No he just sits in judgment of everyone and looks for ways to be holier-than-thou. But based on your posts I think you are not giving yourself enough credit – I feel certain that your “standards” would be right in line with his.
You missed my point. I should have used the words “different standards”. But I think you actually knew what I meant. My point was I wanted to hire someone to perform a service for me who refused because of his religion. I don’t agree with him but I respect him.
Businesses that want to turn away paying customers due to some “religious” belief are OK with me. Most of these yahoos pick and choose among beliefs that only suit their preconceived notions anyway. If they want to cut off their noses to spite their faces, fine. Just put up a “no gays” sign so I, a non-discriminating male, will know to stay away.
I don’t understand why in the cases of cake makers, florists and photographers that gay people want the right to pay their money to people who despise them.
It seems to me that a much better way to deal with them is to find out who wants to discriminate, publicize that and let their businesses take the hits for it.
So in the end we can boil it down to this. The religious right does not believe gay people when they say they were born gay. They think being gay is a choice and that anyone should be allowed to discriminate against people who chooses a life style they disagree with. Of course they have no problem dealing with those who engage in most other types of sins. I think that makes most of them hypocrites. I don’t really believe they have a valid religious objection to baking a cake or pizza for a gay person. I think they are just caught up in the gay hate thing the right wing has going on in this country.
Most gay people believe they were born gay. They do not think it is something they can or should be asked to change. So obviously they believe discrimination against them is unfair. Just like discrimination against black people or hispanics, or women, Are they right? I think so. I think ultimately science will prove being gay is genetic. Once they do I guess that adds a new wrinkle to the puzzle.
In my opinion history will not be kind to people like Mr. Pence, and the pizza maker. They will not be remembered as defenders of faith, Their legacy will be the same as those people who would not let black people sit at lunch counters, As for Mike Pence’s legacy and political future; can you say George Wallace.
For sure, Pence, the pizza maker and the Indiana legislature GOPers care more about the pizza maker, et al, developing their own punishments for the Old Testament evil of homosexuality than they care about following the teachings of Jesus…who never mentioned homosexuality.
But, it’s all part of the ‘Christian Libertarianism’ movement:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/15/opinion/sunday/a-christian-nation-since-when.html?_r=0
Fascinating article.
And, you know Mark Sanford’s ‘C Street’ is one of the fronts for the Abraham Vereide founded group, right? Along with the National Prayer Breakfast which is the main money maker for the group. They sell access to Congress and the president to the most murderous dictators on the planet.
I can’t wait to get the book the author of this article has written.
I read Jeff Sharlet’s ‘The Family’ and ‘C Street’ after Sanford’s hike and learned a lot. Virtually every US foreign policy debacle of the last 65 years can be traced back to that group.
I think I knew most of what was in that article, but it was truly interesting to see it all tied together. Great article.
PRO TIP:
Every time one reads a Kathleen Parker op-ed one’s IQ drops a couple points.
It’s like wearing a cowboy hat?
“Liberties must be balanced”. Liberty is a principle. Not all moral or ethical or legal principles carry the same weight. For example, the right to life trumps the right to privacy. Both are rights, but in situations which involve competing principles a hierarchy of principles provides a framework to assist in resolving dilemmas. It becomes more complicated when, like the current dilemma, when we have not only competing principles, but also competing interests, different definitions of the problem, and different beliefs about what the hierarchy of principles should be. I think when we think about “balanced” liberties, what we are saying is that the goal should be ensuring liberties, but that costs and benefits for the parties will still be present.
Will, I’m sure it’s been a long time since Kathleen Parker excited you. Me too. lol
Apropos of nothing in particular, but may of interest to some: I love Indiana. But it is a state with a complicated history, in terms of tolerance. Much of the KKK-oriented stuff in the Coen brothers’ brilliant movie Oh Brother Wherefore Art Thou was based on that history. Indiana, though not in the South, was the only state in the union that was ever totally run, at one time, by the Klan. The Grand Dragon of the IN KKK was the “power behind the throne” of the governor and much of the legislature in the 30s. A truly evil dude. An actual face-eating murderous rapist! He face-ate and raped a young prostitute, then threw her off a train. Thought he’d killed her. No such luck, for him. She lived, and pressed charges. He was found guilty. The resulting trial and scandal brought down an administration, and brought an end to the KKK’s reign of terror in Indiana.
One of the more famous photos of a lynching was from Marion IN I believe.
“The photograph and the memories remained. As late as the civil rights struggles of the 1950s some whites in Marion reminded African Americans of what would happened if they violated white norms. Increasingly, however, the memories turned to shame, sometimes suppressed in a willful forgetting, sometimes pulled out to encourage the necessity of justice for all.
“No one forgot, certainly not black Americans. Sarah Weaver Pate, a teenager in 1930, told an interviewer in 1994 that “we’re like the rabbit now; we don’t trust the sound of a stick.”[1]James Cameron, the sixteen year-old who survived the lynching, never forgot. He titled his autobiography Time of Terror.[2] He devoted the last decades of his life to telling the story, always in contexts of justice and American ideals. More Americans came to understand that lynching was not a sidebar but a central feature of American history.”
Source:
Terrorism and the American Experience
…
Photograph of a 1930 lynching in Marion, Indiana
Essay by James H. Madison
http://www.journalofamericanhistory.org/teaching/2011_06/sources/day2ex1_photo_madison.htmlS
The Golden Era of Indiana
A majority of people have an already formed image of the Ku Klux Klan in their minds. Men, dressed in white robes and hoods, riding throughout the countryside harassing blacks. Most believe that the Klan is an extinct organization, once comprised of rednecks and racist southerners.
However, unfortunately, the Klan is still alive in Indiana. There was a time in Indiana when Klan membership could help an aspiring political career. Leonard Moore from the University of California has carefully analyzed Klan membership documents of Indiana and discovered that 250,000 white men in Indiana (about 30% of the native-born Caucasian men in Indiana) joined the Klan in the early 1920s.1
The Klan has appeared and disappeared more than four times throughout its history. It is the constant bad dream for a free American society to deal with. Just when you think it’s gone, it rears its ugly head once more. In its various forms and incarnations, the Klan has not entirely remained a southern-dominated organization. White supremacy has always been its goal, its anger and hatred has been used against other minority groups than just black Americans.
…
D.C. Stephenson and the Indiana Klan
A man named Joe Huffington was chosen by Simmons and other top Klan officials to start organizing the Klan in Indiana. Huffington’s first base of operations was located in Evansville, Indiana. In the late summer of 1920 he began preparations to bring the Klan to Indiana. It was not long before Huffington met a young man named D.C. Stephenson.
D.C. Stephenson was born, probably, in Texas and soon would become the most powerful and influential man in Indiana. Stephenson found himself, eventually, in Evansville working as a salesman of bonds for the L.G. Julian Coal Company. By 1921 he was helping Huffington recruit for the newly formed Indiana chapter of the Klan. He was making a pretty good living with both jobs.
The Klan had a large vocabulary of secret words and titles that Stephenson had to learn. William Simmons was known as the imperial wizard, the top office of the Klan. Other office titles included: kligrapp, kludd, nighthawk and cyclops. Their secret meetings and gatherings were known as klonvocations. Membership fees were called klecktoken.
D.C. Stephenson, like all other new members, had to swear an oath of allegiance to the Klan and a vow of secrecy. New recruits were asked 9 questions:
Is the motive prompting your ambition to be a Klansman serious and unselfish?
Are you native born, white, Gentile, American citizens?
Are you absolutely opposed to and free of any allegiance of any nature to cause, government, people, sect, or ruler that is foreign to the United States of America?
Do you esteem the United States of America and its institutions above any other government, civil, political, or ecclesiastical in the whole world?
Will you, without mental reservations, take a solemn oath to defend, preserve, and enforce these same?
Do you believe in Klannishness and will you faithfully practice same toward your fellow Klansmen?
Do you believe in and will you faithfully strive for the eternal maintenance of White Supremacy?
Will you faithfully obey our constitutions and laws, and confirm willingly to all our usages, requirements, and regulations?
Did D.C. Stephenson take the oath seriously? No one really knows. Stephenson’s public speeches aren’t filled with the racist rhetoric as many of the other leaders of the Klan. He usually left the hate speeches up to others in the power structure of the Klan. His talent was centered around organizing the Klan in Indiana and collecting new recruits.
Membership in the Indiana division of the Klan began soaring with each new speech that Stephenson made. The group began to expand to the western states and industrial cities of the Midwest, the Klan was no longer a southern sensation.
The Klan even made inroads into Indiana churches. The Reverend William Forney Harris of the Grand Avenue Methodist Church preached in 1922 that secret societies like the Ku Klux Klan would not get his support. However, these were times of “moral decay,” and as such, any organization that stood for decency and order ought not to be shunned. Other clergy found themselves offering similar endorsements to their congregations as the Klan membership began to grow locally.5
D.C. Stephenson went on to become a powerful political figure in Indiana. His rise to power was short-lived, however. In 1922 David Curtis Stephenson was appointed Grand Dragon of the KKK for Indiana. In 1925 he had met a Madge Oberholtzer, who ran a state program to combat illiteracy, at an inaugural ball for Governor Ed Jackson. She was later abducted from her home in Irvington, a neighborhood of Indianapolis and taken by Stephenson and some of his men to the train station. While on a trip to Hammond, Indiana, Stephenson repeatedly attacked and raped Oberholtzer in one compartment of his Pullman railcar. In Hammond she took poison to frighten Stephenson into letting her go. He immediately rushed her back to Indianapolis where she died a month later, either from the effects of the poison or the severe bite marks she incurred during the rape.
Stephenson was arrested and charged with second-degree murder. The sensational trial took place in Noblesville, Indiana in 1925. His conviction sent Stephenson to the Indiana State Prison in Michigan City, Indiana for the next 31 years (the longest imprisonment in this state for that crime). He was released from prison in 1956 and faded into obscurity, however, not before causing the shocking downfall of many corrupt political officials within Indiana. When he went to jail he was convinced that Governor Ed Jackson, who he had helped elect, would pardon him. Governor Jackson never came through with the pardon and Stephenson began to talk.
The Downfall of the Klan in Indiana
With help from The Indianapolis Times (which won a Pulitzer Prize for its investigations), the structure of Indiana politics would be shaken. Stephenson began to talk about who had helped him rise to power and began to name names. The aftermath was shocking, indictments were filed against Governor Ed Jackson, Marion County Republican chairman George V. “Cap” Coffin, and attorney Robert I. Marsh, charging them with conspiring to bribe former Governor Warren McCray. Even the Mayor of Indianapolis, John Duvall, was convicted and sentenced to jail for 30 days (and barred from political service for 4 years). Some Marion County commissioners also resigned from their posts on charges of accepting bribes from the Klan and Stephenson.
This was not the image that Indiana wanted to portray during its “golden age.” Stephenson at the peak of his political career and influence had remarked, “I am the law in Indiana.”
///
SOURCE: http://historymuseumsb.org/the-golden-era-of-indiana/