First Amendment violated by LGBT bigots; Indiana law should stand

By A. Dru Kristenev

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. (Emphasis added)

Expressing one’s own freedom to act within their individual rights of liberty by suppressing those same rights of another is not now, nor ever will be acceptable under the Constitution. Yet, the Left, rallying to support an illegitimate claim that LGBT and other minorities’ rights trump those of individuals whose beliefs are different, have once more overstepped the letter of the Law. And this time, the singular Law of the Land, the Constitution, is quoted above to clarify the misconceptions of those claiming discrimination in the passage of Indiana’s law protecting the right of “free exercise” of religion. The trouble is, there should never have been any need to pass this law. Undue pressure that narrow-minded special interests have brought to bear, in an attempt to force individuals to abrogate their own beliefs, created the need for Indiana, along with numerous other state legislatures, to address the rampant discrimination against religious individuals.

Indiana legislators were correct in crafting the bill based on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to rein-in the abuse of the legal system that has hampered, penalized and even closed businesses owned by those of faith. The egregious mishandling of lawsuits brought against bakers, florists, photographers and ministers attempting to live by their religious beliefs, has left communities in shambles, pompous personalities siding with whiners to validate their personal whims.

For some reason, attorneys representing those reeling from malicious lawsuits levied to destroy livelihoods don’t appear to be accessing last year’s Supreme Court precedent-setting decision in favor of Hobby Lobby.1 Just as it was found that the Affordable Care Act contraceptive mandate “requires the Hahns and Greens to engage in conduct that seriously violates their sincere religious belief that life begins at conception,” forcing Christian business owners to provide services explicitly for same-sex marriages, effectually condoning the ceremonies, also “seriously violates their sincere religious belief.” Declining to provide service for these unions does not violate the right of those participating in the union to go forward with their plans. Nor does it discriminate against the individuals any more than Hobby Lobby discriminated against their employees. The employees were, and are, free to receive the service elsewhere as are the participants in same-sex nuptials.

Pressuring religious business owners to go against their faith “seriously burdens the exercise of religion.” Those from the LGBT community compelling others to defy their closely held religious beliefs are, in fact, the discriminators. They discriminate against religious business owners by targeting them for legal action under the guise of having suffered harm. In fact, no harm was done or intended. Any one of the businesses enduring discriminatory lawsuits have or would provide service as long as it did not contravene their beliefs, such as a birthday cake or photos for a family reunion.

Shallow attempts to equate protecting an individual’s religious belief with Jim Crow laws are inexcusable. Refusing to serve an individual because of their skin color does not correlate to a business not providing a service for a specific occasion. A human being and a festive occasion are two completely separate issues; one is a living, breathing person and the other isn’t even an inanimate object but an activity—it’s aparty.

So, the next time a college student plans to have booze at his shindig and the folks say they won’t provide it, are they discriminating against their son or daughter? No, they love their child and prefer not to aid something they consider to be unwise, perhaps due to religious beliefs. Those who would not bake a wedding cake for a gay couple are exercising the same kind of restraint in not actively promoting something that goes against their beliefs. Now, the student might locate someone   else to supply the alcohol, which is their prerogative, and the merriment ensues without parentally purchased spirits. Just the same, a gay couple can always find some other business to sell them the party favors. No discrimination intended or realized.

Civilized (meaning individuals acting civilly toward one another) society respects others’ beliefs and finds a way to work as a whole, rather than splinter the community with damaging litigation stemming from ill-conceived anti-discrimination ordinances. The result of true discrimination is the demise of civilized society, exactly like what is occurring across the Middle East where Christians are singled-out for beatings, kidnapping, murder and their churches desecrated and destroyed. It’s happened before and by taking self-satisfied, intolerant cries of “discrimination” to the next level of shutting down private enterprise, it can, and will, happen again.

1) See Sebelius’ fallacious argument against Hobby Lobby, Page 49, Pay Attention!!



In Case You Missed It:  BREAKING: President Trump Announces NEW Information From ARIZONA: “It Is Damning And Determinative! Will Be Discussing This Today.”
Posted in Freedoms and tagged , , , , , , .