There is an interesting case out of Idaho that could be a critical showdown between anti-discrimination laws and freedom of exercise of religion. At the heart of the controversy are two Christian ministers, Donald and Evelyn Knapp, who own a Coeur d’Alene wedding chapel. They have been told that they must either perform same-sex weddings or face a $1000 fine. It raises a legitimate claim of the encroachment of state laws into areas of faith — a question that has been previously raised in less direct ways involving bakeries, photographers and other businesses that has refused for religious reasons to service same-sex marriages. We have previously discussed the difficulty in drawing lines under the First Amendment. If this business is protected, then why is not a bakery of religious individuals? Conversely, if this business is not protected, how about all of the religions that accept payments for religious services?
The case centers on the Hitching Post Wedding Chapel in Coeur d’Alene, which is registered with the state as a “religious corporation” limited to performing “one-man-one-woman marriages as defined by the Holy Bible.” However, unlike most churches, this is registered as a for-profit business. It is not unique in such a status, but that distinction could prove determinative in the case.
The city has an ordinance passed last year that prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation in matters of housing, employment and public accommodation. As a for-profit business, the ordinance does not treat the Hitching Post Wedding Chapel any different from a car wash.
Of course, it is different in the character of its work. The controversy however has played out in a variety of different contexts. This is an issue that we previously discussed when Harvard banned men from workout areas to satisfy the demands of Muslim women as well as other accommodations at other universities. Conversely, cities have banned the boy scouts because they exclude gay scout leaders and were thus discriminatory organizations. We have also seen private businesses who have been forced not to discriminate against homosexuals such a bakeries, florists, and photographers. I have previously written on the growing collision of free exercise of religion and anti-discrimination laws. Where does one draw the line where a florist cannot bar a homosexual but a grocery can bar males? The inherent conflicts in these cases leaves us without a single cognizable rule.
That is why this case could be so important. While I have long supported gay rights and same-sex marriage, I am sympathetic with the Knapps. I have great concern over the state telling a religious business to violate the core of its religious values. One possible distinction would be to require a non-for-profit status, but that distinction does not answer all of these questions. Churches and synagogues often receive payment for marriages even though they are non-for-profit. Moreover, most not-for-profit corporations are non-religious. The distinction avoids the key question: do people (and corporations) have a right to follow core religious principles. The recent ruling in Hobby Lobby would seem to support such a claim.
The case in Idaho is the perfect microcosm of the various national issues swirling around same-sex marriage. Same-sex marriage has long been illegal in Idaho so this issue had not arisen for the couple. However, last week the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued an order on May 13 allowing same-sex marriages to commence in Idaho on Oct. 15. It was just two days later that the couple received a call asking for a same-sex wedding ceremony. When they declined, they were contacted by the city.
I believe that the couple has a strong argument under the First Amendment as well as Idaho’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Regardless of one’s view of the merits, however, this could be a defining moment for constitutional law.
Source: Spokesman
MATT 10:30 But the very hairs of your head are all numbered.
Good, because hairs numbered 43-20056 have gone missing.
Is God like the NSA and can God find them for me?
Words matter: Special protections.
Really, what’s amazing is the religious orgs that seek to discriminate are the ones seeking these special protections. (see above update)
That’ll just mean I won’t ever patronize their business… NOT force them to do business. It’s called economics 101. I’ll get married in a Church and invite the congregation that welcomed me, NOT pushed me away.
p.s.
That also means word of mouth and business reviews and bad publicity.
I guess the FOR-PROFIT driven religiously minded will need to reexamine their business model. Maybe follow Christ closer to his Word and give away all their belongings to the poor, THEN follow him.
Max-1 wrote: “That’ll just mean I won’t ever patronize their business… NOT force them to do business. It’s called economics 101. I’ll get married in a Church and invite the congregation that welcomed me, NOT pushed me away. That also means word of mouth and business reviews and bad publicity. … Maybe follow Christ closer to his Word and give away all their belongings to the poor, THEN follow him.”
Exactly right, Max. I like it when we come to agreement. Expose those religious hypocrites. I like it.
davidm
No, that would not be correct. Being gay is legal, and gay people should be afforded the same protections of the law as anyone else. However, gay people should NOT be afforded special protections, because then the law is not based upon equality.
= = =
Being black is legal too. And people should be afforded the same protections of the law as anyone else. HOWEVER (and this is the lynchpin in the logic) black people should NOT be afforded “special protections” (think busses, lunch counters, drinking fountains, entrances, etc.) because then the law is not based upon equality.
Like that?
Max-1 wrote: “… black people should NOT be afforded “special protections” (think busses, lunch counters, drinking fountains, entrances, etc.) because then the law is not based upon equality. Like that?”
Yes, like that. These laws are completely unnecessary. Someone might make the argument that at one time before I was born, these laws were necessary. In modern times, these anti-discrimination laws are completely unnecessary.
davidm,
I’ll misquote for you, too. 🙂
MATT 10: 23 But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.
24 The disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his lord.
So, why not flee davidm? Why not insist the Knapps flee? Jesus said as much, NO? But then again, condemning others in the name of Christ is the work of Christians because, like their Master and Teacher, THOU SHALT NOT JUDGE.
davidm2575
Matt 10: ALL OF IT, please.
It was Christ speaking to his disciples on spreading the word of God. A quote, out of context, can be fun, but it can be wrong, too. What does it say about false witnessing…davidm?
Have I rejected Christ’s word? Judge me, please davidm.
Max-1 wrote: “A quote, out of context,…”
You asked where Jesus taught discrimination, so I gave you an example of one context in which he taught discrimination. Most of the people Jesus spoke against were religious leaders. On the other hand, he came to save people like you and me, Max. You should be encouraged by that.
Annie
Max, as a heterosexual, I apologize to you for the hatred and bigotry shown to you by othere heterosexuals on this thread.
= = =
Thanks.
I guess they think I deserve it. You know, outspoken I am.
Like I said to davidm, none of the vitriol and hate is new to me. The older I get, the more regular and expected it becomes. People will double down on their self justified fears, because their bigotry demands it. Annie, I look at it this way, they’re revealing their character to all of us and before God. That is all.
Peace.
Max-1 wrote: “… none of the vitriol and hate is new to me.”
Please, max. You know that I am not spreading vitriol and hate. I object to the change in the definition of marriage, and I object to marginalizing the reproductive purpose of sexual relations and encouraging an attitude of sex for pleasure. Now how can I express these objections without you calling me a hater?
Coeur d’Alene Says Hitching Post Is Exempt From Gay Rights Law
http://boisestatepublicradio.org/post/coeur-dalene-says-hitching-post-exempt-gay-rights-law
I guess the question is, will the Knapps continue to be a for-profit self victimizing religious Corporation supported by religiously biased supporters?
My instincts tell me that this is a test case being put together by the ADF. And before anyone goes berserk, I am not suggesting anything improper. Test cases are perfectly permissible methods for testing the constitutionality of laws. The Hitching Post owners have restructured the company since the adoption of the ordinance at issue. In addition, changes have been made to the website within the past few days, including wedding policy changes now spelled out in detail in a statement that was clearly drafted by lawyers tracking the language of the Hobby Lobby decision. I assume that the goal is to extend current law to exempt any for-profit business from the requirements of public accommodation laws based upon the religious objections of the owners.
Mike Appleton wrote: “My instincts tell me that this is a test case being put together by the ADF. … The Hitching Post owners have restructured the company since the adoption of the ordinance at issue. In addition, changes have been made to the website…”
I think we have a combination of factors, 1) a man and wife trying to keep their butts out of jail, and 2) an ADF attorney gladly fighting to protect the Constitutional rights of everyone in the same boat as the Knapps. Calling that a test case is fine.
David, ” I haven’t heard anyone claim that a formal complaint was filed, so that is not a lie. Exactly what statements do you think is a lie?”
JT says, “It was just two days later that the couple received a call asking for a same-sex wedding ceremony. When they declined, they were contacted by the city. ”
This is what the city says never happened.
And we KNOW the clerks at the city wouldn’t lie, right? Or, maybe they are just misinformed or not aware of all the events in their offices. Or, maybe they are right and are telling the truth. It’s almost impossible for people not actually involved in the events to be sure what the reality is, even with the help of the Internet’s ability to magnify gossip a million times over today.
Tyger Gilbert wrote: “It’s almost impossible for people not actually involved in the events to be sure what the reality is…”
Exactly! It could be that the Knapps received the request from a gay couple, turned them down, then called the city for clarification. The city says their attorney will call them back. Then the city attorney calls them a few days later and says yup, you would be in trouble if you don’t perform the wedding. Later it is reported that the city called them up and told them they better not reject same sex marriages or they would be in violation of the law.
What is sad is the chilling effect this has on the Knapps. After 27 years of doing weddings there, they are starting to look for another line of work.
The source article mentions 1st District Senior Judge Eugene Marano who is in a quandary. Would he be in violation of the ordinance if he refuses for religious reasons to wed a same sex couple? His position right now is that Judges are not obligated to perform weddings. They are only authorized to perform them.
All of these legal problems could have been avoided if the homosexual advocates were satisfied with domestic partnerships or civil unions. Virtually none of the marriage laws were passed with same sex marriage in mind, so one solution would be to have every single marriage law declared null and void and legislation about marriage revoted upon by the legislature. They have completely corrupted our legislative and judicial process.
bettykath wrote: “JT says, ‘It was just two days later that the couple received a call asking for a same-sex wedding ceremony. When they declined, they were contacted by the city.’ This is what the city says never happened.”
I did not read that in the article on CDAPress. In fact, the article makes it clear that the city attorney had multiple communications with the Knapps. According to the article leejcaroll claimed exposed a lie, the city attorney said that the Knapps were told by his office that if a complaint was filed against them for refusing to provide service to gay individuals seeking to marry, they would likely be in violation of the city’s ordinance, based on their corporate status. Where do you find the statement that the city denies communicating with the Knapps about the trouble they would be in if someone did file a complaint?
David, Thanks for your response. For the businesses, you seem to be of the mindset that lunch counters are only for those approved of by the operator of the counter. I probably wouldn’t use services from people who were disapproving of me, but I should have the right to and they should provide their service to me with the same quality and the same price as for others.
As to middle school students reading about two daddys or two mommys, there are plenty of middle school kids living with two daddys or two mommys. Some have homosexual parents, others are the children of divorce who have parents who have remarried. I know, you meant just those with homosexual parents. I think that such stories help classmates to better understand the lives of those living in such homes. There is no need to shun their classmates.
I’m with you on the amount of passionate kissing and sex. I’m uncomfortable with public displays of foreplay regardless of the gender of the participants.
It’s about time that school sex ed programs explicitly deal with the dangers of various sexual practices whether by homosexual partners or heterosexual partners. I guess I agree with your statement of the problem, but I prefer to look at prevention, not condemnation.
Alcoholism IS a disease and the alcoholic has only limited control, in some cases no control. It’s a function, or rather malfunction, of the brain. It’s great that the 12 steps help some people to deal with it, but there is no cure for alcoholism, and many in the 12 step program regress. It’s one day at a time and they count the days since their last drink. There are many restarts. Alcoholics shouldn’t be a protected class but more research is needed to deal with the brain malfunction so that there is a cure.
bettykath wrote: “I probably wouldn’t use services from people who were disapproving of me, but I should have the right to and they should provide their service to me with the same quality and the same price as for others.”
And you know that a gay person getting married would not be turned away by the Knapps. Many gay people are married to someone of the opposite sex. Any gay person who wants to marry a person of the opposite sex is free to do so.
bettykath wrote: “I think that such stories help classmates to better understand the lives of those living in such homes.”
I think it is confusing for children in kindergarten to deal with sexual issues of any kind. Especially when they make up such a small percentage of the population, it really is unnecessary. The real purpose obviously is to spread propaganda in favor of mainstreaming homosexuality.
bettykath wrote: “It’s about time that school sex ed programs explicitly deal with the dangers of various sexual practices whether by homosexual partners or heterosexual partners. I guess I agree with your statement of the problem, but I prefer to look at prevention, not condemnation.”
Fair enough, but the prevention of homosexual behavior based on its unhealthiness is frowned upon as being condemnation.
bettykath wrote: “Alcoholism IS a disease and the alcoholic has only limited control, in some cases no control. It’s a function, or rather malfunction, of the brain. It’s great that the 12 steps help some people to deal with it, but there is no cure for alcoholism, and many in the 12 step program regress. It’s one day at a time and they count the days since their last drink. There are many restarts. Alcoholics shouldn’t be a protected class but more research is needed to deal with the brain malfunction so that there is a cure.”
This perspective of alcoholism is exactly how many looked at homosexuality just 35 years ago. The problem is that the sex addiction involved is a much more powerful force than a chemical addiction to alcohol.
Max gave you the poster , Here is a click, the hitching post story is a lie but people like David, Mike Huckabee, Tony Starnes, etc of Fox news will continue to rely on it to defend their homophobia. http://www.cdapress.com/news/local_news/article_129c54cc-3dda-5868-8278-838cde92e17e.html
leejcaroll wrote: ” … the hitching post story is a lie but people like David … will continue to rely on it to defend their homophobia.”
If this story is a lie, then you had better get in touch with professor Turley. I do not think he would post a lie on his blog.
I read the article you linked to, but I fail to see how it exposes any lie about the story. The professor only told us about a possible fine. Your article conveyed the Knapps also might face 6 months in jail if as a business performing traditional weddings they do not also perform the new same sex weddings. It is not a lie to mention only the fine and not the possible jail time. I haven’t heard anyone claim that a formal complaint was filed, so that is not a lie. Exactly what statements do you think is a lie?
The truth is that homosexuals expect society to fully approve of and participate in their sexual proclivities. They want to force ministers to wed same sex couples even when it is contrary to their conscience and religious beliefs. The only legal way out is if they create a religious establishment. Then the law will show them favoritism and allow them not to obey that demand.
David, ” When homosexuals use the force of government to foist immoral and dangerous practices upon society, ”
” The civil laws of a pluralistic society should not show favoritism toward gay people anymore than it should show favoritism toward Jews, Christians, or Muslims.”
The first statement: How have homosexuals used the force of government to foist immoral and dangerous practices upon [sic] society? I’m not aware of any changes to my life that are even encouraged, let alone forced, on me because of anything that homosexuals and/or the government has done on “their” behalf. How has your life been affected and by what, exactly?
The second statement: I generally agree with this statement but “gay” isn’t a religion. It’s strange that you would make that comparison. Why?
bettykath, if you read my statement, it was not about me but about society. My thoughts were about the bakers, photographers, the Knapps, the people of Houston having a mayor obstructing a vote on an ordinance, parents of kindergarten through middle school students having to contend with a book about two daddies, the bombardment of homosexual kissing and implied sex in the movie industry, and young high school and college aged men exploring sexuality but not being warned about the inherent dangers of homosexual sex.
As for why bring up religion in that statement, religion is a federally protected class. I’m sure the homosexual advocates would love to see sexual orientation become a federally protected class. Furthermore, the twin studies on gays causes me to put more importance upon cognitive factors involved with a person becoming a homosexual. Therefore, I perceive being gay more like joining a religion than being like race. It looks even more to me like alcoholism, but that is not a protected class of people yet, even though most look at alcoholism as a disease that is not under the alcoholic’s control.
David, you may not belong to a church or an organized religion, but you are the epitome of a Fundamentalist Christian.
Max, as a heterosexual, I apologize to you for the hatred and bigotry shown to you by othere heterosexuals on this thread.
s/b … corrupted message
Ugh, YouTube… They like to chain videos from accounts.
Here’s the one I meant to post. Feel free to scroll down the above video of other like examples of exporters of hate. Know how many Christian fundamentalists are involved in creating a climate of FEAR and HATE hidden behind the corrupt message of Jesus Christ. These people incite others, teach others and show others how to hate with love (like that was a Jesus thing?).
http://youtu.be/7-8rzcDGWd8
EXPORT OF HATE
http://youtu.be/7-8rzcDGWd8?list=UUHZeKyjqpK9diTD1g4yDl5g
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2jgph-ZfK5k/VEe7U6I3RVI/AAAAAAADLwQ/39xXagjVt3k/s1600/HitchingPostFactCheck.jpg
Religion is the bane of Freedom…
… Its chains bind mankind to the whims of a few men.
When will America be free FROM religious slavery?
Max-1 wrote: “Religion is the bane of Freedom… Its chains bind mankind to the whims of a few men. When will America be free FROM religious slavery?”
It is pretty easy to be free of religion. You just choose not to join any religion. I am completely free from religious slavery. In regards to religion, I am not bound to the whims of a few men. Now in regards to government, that is another issue entirely. I have no choice but to be bound to the whims of those who run government.
More religious fundamentalism in America…
… A firestorm of pure, unadulterated religiously based HATE!
(Praise jeebus, NO?)
Pat Robertson: Gays Acting Like Terrorists
Max-1 wrote: “A firestorm of pure, unadulterated religiously based HATE!”
Pat Robertson is not expressing hatred in this video. The gay mayor in Houston was wrong to subpoena sermons in her witch hunt for anti-gay speech. The real hatred is coming from the gay mayor who does not want a bad law voted upon.