Arizona passes bill protecting freedom of business owners who refuse services to same-sex ‘weddings’
BY CATHERINE BRIGGS
SB 1062 would provide business owners the grounds to deny their services to same-sex “marriages.”
The bill, which now awaits the signature of Gov. Jan Brewer, has been lambasted as discriminatory by its opponents, but its defenders say it’s a necessary protection for religious freedom.
In the past few years, there have been several cases of business ownersfacing lawsuits after refusing to provide their services to gay couples at their “weddings.” This bill would prevent such suits from being filed in Arizona and would protect objecting business owners from facing heavy fines.
This bill has a lion’s share of opponents.
Both of Arizona’s federal senators, each Republican, have urged Gov. Brewer to veto SB 1062. Sens. John McCain and Jeff Flake conveyed their opposition via Twitter on Monday. Of the nine Arizona members of the United States House of Representatives, all four Democrats have spoken out in opposition to the bill. One Republican representative has refused to comment while the other four have not yet commented.
Daniel Mach, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s religion and belief program, said, “Religious freedom is a fundamental right, but it’s not a blank check to harm others or impose our faith on our neighbors.” The ACLU opposes the legislation.
In a column written for The Daily Beast, Kirsten Powers and Jonathon Merritt argued that if Christians have the right to deny services for gay “marriages” on a biblical basis, they should also refuse their services to other “unbiblical” ceremonies, such as those involving divorced couples.
“If you refuse to photograph one unbiblical wedding,” the columnists write, “you should refuse to photograph them all. If not, you'll be seen as a hypocrite and as a known Christian, heap shame on the Gospel. As all Christians know, Jesus saved his harshest words for the hypocritical behavior of religious people. So, if Christian wedding vendors want to live by a law the Bible does not prescribe, they must at least be consistent.”
In a response to this article, Southern Baptist ethicist Russell D. Moore pointed out the stark difference between heterosexual and homosexual unions. He states, “In the case of a same-sex marriage, the marriage is obviously wrong, in every case. There are no circumstances in which a man and a man or a woman and a woman can be morally involved in a sexual union."
This response followed a February 20 podcast in which Moore spelled out the distinction between unlawful heterosexual marriages and homosexual “marriages,” effectively debunking Powers and Merritt’s accusation of hypocrisy.
"While a biblical view of marriage would see that such people (fornicators, believers to unbelievers, unlawfully divorced, etc.) should not get married, and that the church has no authority to marry them, we also would affirm that such people, when married, actually are married. A pastor who joins a believer to an unbeliever bears an awful responsibility for doing something wrong, but the end result is an actual marriage.
"The same-sex marriage differs not in terms of morality, but in terms of reality. It is not that homosexuality is some sort of wholly different or unforgivable sexual sin. It's that the historic Christian view of marriage means that without sexual complementarity there is no marriage at all."
The reaction to SB 1062 from the media has been heated to say the least. In an interview with CNN news anchor Chris Cuomo, Kelly Fiedorek, attorney for the Alliance Defending Freedom, tried explaining the bill and how it would protect religious freedom.
“[There’s] a basic difference,” Ms. Fiedoreck says, “between denying someone a cup of coffee or a piece of pizza or selling someone a pencil versus forcing someone to use their creative ability to create a message to support an event, to support an idea that goes against their beliefs.”
“For example,” she continued, “we would not force a Muslim to participate in a Koran-burning ceremony. We wouldn’t ask a black photographer and force them to go take a picture of a KKK event. This is America and in America we should be able to live freely and not be forced to endorse ideas.”
Cathi Herrod, president of the Center for Arizona Policy, responded to the fiery reaction to the passing of SB 1062 in a statement on Saturday.
“The attacks on SB 1062,” Herrod states, “show politics at its absolute worse. They represent precisely why so many people are sick of the modern political debate. Instead of having an honest discussion about the true meaning of religious liberty, opponents of the bill have hijacked this discussion through lies, personal attacks, and irresponsible reporting.”
“I urge Governor Brewer,” she continues, “to send a clear message to the country that in Arizona, everyone, regardless of their faith, will be protected in Arizona by signing SB 1062."
The bill is expected to be signed or vetoed by Gov. Brewer this week. Ms. Brewer vetoed a similar bill last year during a self-imposed freeze on signing legislation until a budget was passed for the 2014 fiscal year.
BY CATHERINE BRIGGS
- Tue Feb 25, 2014 11:45 EST
SB 1062 would provide business owners the grounds to deny their services to same-sex “marriages.”
The bill, which now awaits the signature of Gov. Jan Brewer, has been lambasted as discriminatory by its opponents, but its defenders say it’s a necessary protection for religious freedom.
In the past few years, there have been several cases of business ownersfacing lawsuits after refusing to provide their services to gay couples at their “weddings.” This bill would prevent such suits from being filed in Arizona and would protect objecting business owners from facing heavy fines.
This bill has a lion’s share of opponents.
Both of Arizona’s federal senators, each Republican, have urged Gov. Brewer to veto SB 1062. Sens. John McCain and Jeff Flake conveyed their opposition via Twitter on Monday. Of the nine Arizona members of the United States House of Representatives, all four Democrats have spoken out in opposition to the bill. One Republican representative has refused to comment while the other four have not yet commented.
Daniel Mach, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s religion and belief program, said, “Religious freedom is a fundamental right, but it’s not a blank check to harm others or impose our faith on our neighbors.” The ACLU opposes the legislation.
In a column written for The Daily Beast, Kirsten Powers and Jonathon Merritt argued that if Christians have the right to deny services for gay “marriages” on a biblical basis, they should also refuse their services to other “unbiblical” ceremonies, such as those involving divorced couples.
“If you refuse to photograph one unbiblical wedding,” the columnists write, “you should refuse to photograph them all. If not, you'll be seen as a hypocrite and as a known Christian, heap shame on the Gospel. As all Christians know, Jesus saved his harshest words for the hypocritical behavior of religious people. So, if Christian wedding vendors want to live by a law the Bible does not prescribe, they must at least be consistent.”
In a response to this article, Southern Baptist ethicist Russell D. Moore pointed out the stark difference between heterosexual and homosexual unions. He states, “In the case of a same-sex marriage, the marriage is obviously wrong, in every case. There are no circumstances in which a man and a man or a woman and a woman can be morally involved in a sexual union."
This response followed a February 20 podcast in which Moore spelled out the distinction between unlawful heterosexual marriages and homosexual “marriages,” effectively debunking Powers and Merritt’s accusation of hypocrisy.
"While a biblical view of marriage would see that such people (fornicators, believers to unbelievers, unlawfully divorced, etc.) should not get married, and that the church has no authority to marry them, we also would affirm that such people, when married, actually are married. A pastor who joins a believer to an unbeliever bears an awful responsibility for doing something wrong, but the end result is an actual marriage.
"The same-sex marriage differs not in terms of morality, but in terms of reality. It is not that homosexuality is some sort of wholly different or unforgivable sexual sin. It's that the historic Christian view of marriage means that without sexual complementarity there is no marriage at all."
The reaction to SB 1062 from the media has been heated to say the least. In an interview with CNN news anchor Chris Cuomo, Kelly Fiedorek, attorney for the Alliance Defending Freedom, tried explaining the bill and how it would protect religious freedom.
“[There’s] a basic difference,” Ms. Fiedoreck says, “between denying someone a cup of coffee or a piece of pizza or selling someone a pencil versus forcing someone to use their creative ability to create a message to support an event, to support an idea that goes against their beliefs.”
“For example,” she continued, “we would not force a Muslim to participate in a Koran-burning ceremony. We wouldn’t ask a black photographer and force them to go take a picture of a KKK event. This is America and in America we should be able to live freely and not be forced to endorse ideas.”
Cathi Herrod, president of the Center for Arizona Policy, responded to the fiery reaction to the passing of SB 1062 in a statement on Saturday.
“The attacks on SB 1062,” Herrod states, “show politics at its absolute worse. They represent precisely why so many people are sick of the modern political debate. Instead of having an honest discussion about the true meaning of religious liberty, opponents of the bill have hijacked this discussion through lies, personal attacks, and irresponsible reporting.”
“I urge Governor Brewer,” she continues, “to send a clear message to the country that in Arizona, everyone, regardless of their faith, will be protected in Arizona by signing SB 1062."
The bill is expected to be signed or vetoed by Gov. Brewer this week. Ms. Brewer vetoed a similar bill last year during a self-imposed freeze on signing legislation until a budget was passed for the 2014 fiscal year.
I don't have a favorable opinion of gays and definitely think it's a choice. I however don't think it's a fight worth fighting. Preventing two adults from loving each other or going to a place of commerce is just not ever going to be accepted in America. There are much bigger issues in this world to worry about then what gay people are doing.
In 1973 homosexuality was removed from the DSM-II classification of mental disorders and replaced by the category Sexual Orientation Disturbance.
Noteworthy about this is that the removal of homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses was not triggered by some scientific breakthrough. There was no new fact or set of facts that stimulated this major change.
Note that Transexuals are still viewed as having a mental disorder. That will change once they get around to stomping out any dissent.
The debate has NEVER EVER been about "allowing two people to love each other" - who FUCKING CARES.
Not worth fighting?
So what does a business owner do if some embittered mentally unstable f-a-g (remember, homosexuality was considered a mental illness by the American Psychological Association...until the radicals bullied them into changing it) sues them for not participating in the sham they call a "wedding"?
This is nuts.
Roy Simmons, ex-NY Giant who came out as gay and HIV positive, dies at 57
Simmons, who had recently been hospitalized with pneumonia, went out of his way during his NFL career to hide his homosexuality, all the while frequenting New York City's gay bathhouses and paying for sex with male hookers. He ended up a homeless prostitute in San Francisco, earning $15 a trick, and continued to be conflicted with his homosexuality later on in life.
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/f...itive-dead-57-article-1.1700509#ixzz2uNZH3NOD
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another tragic inconvenient fact you won't hear in the lamestream media: Simmons was molested by his gay neighbor when he was 11.
Chew on that reality while the left tells you to "celebrate" Michael Sam and Jason Collins.
Simmons, who had recently been hospitalized with pneumonia, went out of his way during his NFL career to hide his homosexuality, all the while frequenting New York City's gay bathhouses and paying for sex with male hookers. He ended up a homeless prostitute in San Francisco, earning $15 a trick, and continued to be conflicted with his homosexuality later on in life.
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/f...itive-dead-57-article-1.1700509#ixzz2uNZH3NOD
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another tragic inconvenient fact you won't hear in the lamestream media: Simmons was molested by his gay neighbor when he was 11.
Chew on that reality while the left tells you to "celebrate" Michael Sam and Jason Collins.
If a private business owner doesn't want to put, "Congrats Tony and Tim!" on a wedding cake although I disagree with that decision that's his right. And I hope that person's entire community decides to no longer visit his bakery and he has to go OUB.
What I object to and who I properly assign the label BIGOT are people who (in no order) think homosexuality is a choice that can be repaired, throw their interpretation of a holy book at it, and believe these people don't deserve the same freedoms the rest of us have.
And those who equate it to dog fucking or pedophilia (notice how quiet they remain about institutionalized pedophilia in the church) are just being ridiculous to make a point. There is a big difference between two same sex consenting adults and a pervert trying to lure a child. What are they going to claim next, that autism is learned? Might as well institutionalize the ugly kid with the cleft palate because his face is "repulsive."
What I object to and who I properly assign the label BIGOT are people who (in no order) think homosexuality is a choice that can be repaired, throw their interpretation of a holy book at it, and believe these people don't deserve the same freedoms the rest of us have.
And those who equate it to dog fucking or pedophilia (notice how quiet they remain about institutionalized pedophilia in the church) are just being ridiculous to make a point. There is a big difference between two same sex consenting adults and a pervert trying to lure a child. What are they going to claim next, that autism is learned? Might as well institutionalize the ugly kid with the cleft palate because his face is "repulsive."
You have got to be kidding me.
Because "people like me" forced his GAY neighbor to molest him at 11 screwing him up for life.
Because "people like me" gave him AIDS.
Because "people like me" forced him to hang out at gay bath houses and prostitute himself at $15 a trick.
Because "people like me" forced him to be "conflicted" about his sexuality.
Yes, "people like me" put a gun to his head and "shamed" him to his death.
So now you're buying into the whole left wing "blame society" bullshit?
Running out of arguments, Scott?
There is NOTHING 'society' can do to sugar coat the dark side of homosexuality.
We can talk about the dark side of smoking or drugs...we can talk about the dark side of pro sports (concussions)...we can talk about the bad effects of sugar and other dietary "no-nos" the left wants to shove down our throats...but we can't talk about the MANY dark sides of homosexuality?
"Sheriff Joe made him do it!!!" face)(*^%
You're in denial.
So now you're nitpicking one line out of my previous two posts? Ignoring the rest of those posts and then spouting words from my keyboard that I never typed. How Lefty of ya! Don't group me into a "Wing." That's your paradigm not mine. I have an opinion on some issues, and others I have none. I didn't blame you for Simmon's rough life Joe. But I blame intolerant people like you who believe those who are born gay should just shut up and suppress it, and deny themselves happiness because you have a problem with it.
I will NEVER run out of arguments. But here's another difference between the two of us Joe - Unlike you, I know when I can't get through to someone. And that someone is you. You are an obsessed Right Wing Whackjob. You have more in common with the Far Leftys on this site than you want to see. You accuse THEM of needing to have the last word, yet you suffer from the same malady. Here they are, always having to reply, believing their internet postings will change the world. And here you are, doing the same. See unlike you Joe, I know when to walk away. Run out of arguments, nah. Run out of different ways of speaking truth to a cement head, yep. I've spoken my piece on this issue, not Left, not Right, but my Right, vs your Wrong. Enjoy yourself Joe.
"born gay" lol
Even IF there were ANY genetic predispositions to being "born gay" (feel free to stop pretending that there are) that is like saying people are "born with cancer" - patently retarded.
And yes, suppressing it is much healthier than indulging in this self-destructive lifestyle. Ask Roy Simmons.
Face it, you lost this debate when you labeled anyone who doesn't buy into the whole propaganda a bigot - how very left of you.
What would happen to these guys in Uganda?
Two men are facing criminal charges for allegedly filming porn videos with a farmer’s cows.
The farmer says he grew suspicious when his cows stopped producing as much milk and “seemed anxious.” So he set up a hidden camera to see what was going on in the barn when he wasn’t there.
Authorities say the cameras showed two men breaking into the barn in the middle of the night with a video camera. 35-year old Michael Jones is accused of running the camera while 31-year old Reid Fontaine performed sex acts with the cows.
http://news.kron4.com/news/suspicious-farmer-busts-alleged-cow-porn-ring/
Two men are facing criminal charges for allegedly filming porn videos with a farmer’s cows.
The farmer says he grew suspicious when his cows stopped producing as much milk and “seemed anxious.” So he set up a hidden camera to see what was going on in the barn when he wasn’t there.
Authorities say the cameras showed two men breaking into the barn in the middle of the night with a video camera. 35-year old Michael Jones is accused of running the camera while 31-year old Reid Fontaine performed sex acts with the cows.
http://news.kron4.com/news/suspicious-farmer-busts-alleged-cow-porn-ring/
