Friday, February 28, 2014

"Gay person" and "leftist" are not synonymous terms

Three examples:

Tammy Bruce at the Washington Times

This bill, like others across the country, was thought necessary because of the emergence of business, large and small, being attacked by the gay left for either espousing Christian values or acting on their Christian faith. Ranging from a bakery to a photographer, individuals were being sued for refusing to violate their religious beliefs. Having been a liberal “community organizer” in my past, I immediately recognized the strategy being employed. This is an effort to condition the public into automatically equating faith with bigotry. To make faith in the public square illegal and dangerous, you need legal cases and publicity. Voila, lawsuits against small business resting on the notion that acting on genuinely held faith is bigotry per se.
Under these rules, freedom of conscience is squashed under the jackboot of liberals, all in the Orwellian name of “equality and fairness.” Here we are dealing with not just forcing someone to do something for you, but forcing them in the process to violate a sacrament of their faith as well. If we are able to coerce someone, via the threat of lawsuit and personal destruction, to provide a service, how is that not slavery? If we insist that you must violate your faith specifically in that slavish action, how is that not abject tyranny?
Of all the people in the world who should understand the scourge of living under constant threat of losing life, liberty or the ability to make a living because of who you are, it’s gays. It has been disgusting to watch supposed gay “leadership” drag young gays and lesbians through an indoctrination that insists that in order to have equality, you must force other people to do your will, make them betray who they are, and punish them if they offend you.
Horribly, the gay civil rights movement has morphed into a Gay Gestapo. Its ranks will now do the punishing of those who dare to be different or dissent from the approved leftist dogma. To all the young gays who tweet and email me that this is about “equality,” how exactly? Forcing someone to do something against their faith has nothing to do with equality for you, has nothing to do with bigotry and has everything to do with a personal, spiritual understanding of right and wrong.

Chapman at Chapman GOP

and a great post at Gay Patriot, in which he turns the floor over to one of his commenters:

Maybe the response for florists, bakers and photographers is to tell gay couples if they hire their services for their weddings that they will be donating 100% of the profits to a sanctity of marriage group.
Drops the bomb right into the laps of those who for whatever reason want to force religious bakers to bake cakes and photographers to take pictures.

Pretty slick idea, don't you think?




7 comments:

  1. She needs to look up the def of sacrement.

    ReplyDelete
  2. But that is a good idea. What if they purposely inflated their "bid" like contractors and body shops do all the time on a job they don't want to take on. That would increase the amount of their donation to
    the Sanctity of Marriage goup too if they are clueless enough to pay the increased price.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wondering what you'd do if say a gay flower shop owner with a fine reputation for being the best in town refused to provide a bouquet for your beloved hetero squeeze on your anniversary, knowing that you are a vocal Tea Party kinda guy?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Well, some folks choose to sue under present laws in place in their jurisdiction and even patriots are subject to rule of law. It's in the Constitution. And their lawyer can make a lot of money for them and him/herself if they prevail vs. a deep pocket.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Precisely what this bill was designed to prevent, but Brewer's cowardice got the better of her.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Still takes bravery to go vs. rabid TPers. Vetoed. Let's move on...

    ReplyDelete