This week, I appeared on the CNN special addressing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) in Indiana. While I have been a long-standing supporter of same-sex marriage, I raised concerns over the dismissive treatment of religious concerns over the scope of anti-discrimination laws and how they may curtail free exercise of religion. I have previously written both columns and academic work on this collision between the two areas of law. In the program, I raised an example of the growing conflicts that we discussed earlier on this blog of a bakery that refused to make a cake deemed insulting to homosexuals while other bakers are objecting to symbols that they view as insulting to their religious views. This issue also came up with an advocate for LGBT rights on the show:
On the show, Sarah Warbelow, legal director of the Human Rights Campaign, appeared and gave an excellent case for those opposing this law. The HRC does very good legal work and has a distinguished history advocating LBGT rights. I however was most interested in one exchange with host Christ Cuomo:
Cuomo: Now, Sarah, you’re going to hear people flip this analogy on you and say, “Well, wait a minute, if this were a Jewish baker and some KKK couple came in and said, “We want you to make a cake.” If he said no, well than how would you feel about the situation?
Warbelow: Well, most of these business owners really are providing cakes across the board, but there are a select few who are choosing to discriminate. And there’s a huge difference between having to write something objectionable on a cake and being asked to provide a cake for a same sex couple.
The exchange was interesting between Warbelow seems to suggest that bakers should be able to refuse “something objectionable on a cake” but insists that bakers cannot refuse to make cakes that they find objectionable for same-sex couples. For some religious bakers, a cake with a same-sex image or language is objectionable.
My point is only that we are brushing aside a difficult and unresolved question of where to draw this line. We are all so eager to show (as I did above) that we support homosexual rights and/or same sex marriage, that there is little frank discussion of the obvious conflict with free exercise and free speech. There is also a limited discussion of the difference between certain forms of expressive arts like photography or baking as opposed to less expressions forms like diners or transportation businesses. For example, there does seem a meaningful distinction between serving a gay couple at a diner and a photographer who is asked to participate in a same-sex marriage and celebration in recording the event and arranging photo settings. That does not mean that we would not reach the same conclusion, but we are not having this debate.
I have struggled with this collision between anti-discrimination laws and free speech/free exercise for many years. I still remain uncertain on whether to draw this line between the two cakes that I described. We should have an answer for those citizens who are raising these concerns rather than dismiss them all as bigots. If the HRC is saying that bakers can refuse to make objectionable cakes, we should have a better understanding of when such objections are deemed legitimate and protected. Free speech and free exercise are rights that require bright line rules to avoid the chilling effect of possible criminal or civil liability. We need to be able to explain why the refusal to make one of these cakes is an unlawful form of bigotry and why the other is a permissible form of free speech.
What do you think?
@ Nick Spinelli
“In Clay v US, Cassius Clay, aka Muhammad Ali, refused induction by the draft on religious grounds. SCOTUS ruled unanimously in his favor that he could not be compelled to participate in an activity that his religion opposed. Now, the irony does not escape many of us here. Firstly, Ali was the darling of liberals and he became a folk hero for opposing to fight in Viet Nam. “Ain’t no Viet Cong done nuthin’ to me” being the oft heard phrase. The other ironic twist being the assertion Islam not allowing him to kill.”
I believe what Ali actually said was, “I ain’t got nothin’ against the Viet Cong. No Viet Cong ever called me nigger.”
Source: “Muhammad Ali — The Measure of a Man.” (Spring 1967). Freedomways, 7(2), 101-102.
He also said, “I have searched my conscience and I find I cannot be true to my belief in my religion by accepting such a call.”
Ali took the position he did at great personal expense, including being stripped of his heavyweight crown and his boxing license, unlike John Kerry, who enlisted to participate in that imperialist war of aggression, he said, in order to enhance his political credentials and prospects.
“Could it be that you find it ironic that Ali’s religion did not permit him to kill others because of your interpretation of his religion, rather than his?
Could you just possibly be doing the same thing with untold numbers of other Muslims?
@Ken Rogers
Well, I actually watched all 9 parts of the debunking of The House of Numbers. I really think that you should do the same, because your promulgation of aids denialism is helping to murder people. Here is the last part:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjCC8ywjYFc
Please watch all the stuff in between.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
“I seriously do not understand what is going on here. If one is Christ Centered and has Christ Consciousness, none of this would be an issue. It would be a non issue.”
I have no idea what this refers to. Loving thy neighbor doesn’t mean helping him live a sinful life or commit a sinful act or participating in something frowned upon by your Church or Christianity. It seems to me that’s exactly the opposite of what Christ meant.
Rcocean
“I seriously do not understand what is going on here. If one is Christ Centered and has Christ Consciousness, none of this would be an issue. It would be a non issue.”
I have no idea what this refers to. Loving thy neighbor doesn’t mean helping him live a sinful life or commit a sinful act or participating in something frowned upon by your Church or Christianity. It seems to me that’s exactly the opposite of what Christ meant.
Hi Rcocean
Thank you for answering me
First of all, this is not frowned on upon my Church as I made perfectly clear. It is not frowned on by some branches of Judaism either. People in the 19th century during the Jonathan Edwards Great Awakening seem to have forgotten what sin really meant and now the definition has been changed in out dictionaries to reflect the meanings. In the older versions of the Bible Transgressions and Iniquities were voiced separately from Sin because Sin in Greek was Separation from God and in Hebrew it was forgetting yourself so you did do things that you should have better judgement.
We are not here to constantly pick at our brothers when they are loving each other regarding their sexual proclivities no matter what you might think as our constitution protects us from that.
I truly don’t believe Jesus would care if a woman and a woman would marry each other or a man and a man. Okay? Now, you can think what you want, but I think if they loved each other and cared for each other and that is the way that they were made or they became through harsh punishment and as adults it became their choice, I think that our culture can take it and it would be the utmost hypocrisy to ignore the fact that these things do happen.
If the marriages were encouraged rather than living “in sin” as you would say, then the diseases would slow down. Just like they would for heterosexual couples.
God is not the one who is judging here, it is everyone on this Blog claiming Leviticus Law and that is just the bottom line and the Leviticus law is not even clear. If we followed all Leviticus Law to the letter none of us would have cakes. Tattooed people could not have them either.
No one is breaking the 10 commandments ecept if you are on this blog commenting adultery and commenting about these gays wanting to get married.
Jesus said nothing about Gay people. nothing……..
And they had to have known about them from time memorial.
So, we just changed the Levitican law. Okay then. People get tattoos and personally I am not even going to take this any further because I am getting upset and the Holy Spirit always said for me to come to him for rest when I get this way.
Because I am mad at God right now in the old Testament as I don’t understand all of the language there and at least I don’t play the hypocrite and pretend to.
https://www.facebook.com/notes/earth-we-are-one/the-original-hebrew-word-for-sin-has-been-wrongly-translated-its-true-meaning-wi/312081935474801
The original Hebrew word for sin is very beautiful. By translating it as “sin,” Christians have missed the very message of Jesus. The original Hebrew word for sin is so totally different from your idea of sin that it will be a surprise to you.
The root word means forgetfulness;
it has nothing to do with what you are doing.
The whole thing is whether you are doing it with conscious being or out of unconsciousness.
Are you doing it with a self-remembering or have you completely forgotten yourself?
happypappies.
This lapsed Jew would get along very well with your Christianity. Thank you. Your voice, sadly, will be drowned out by those trying to get the last word in. I suppose I’m one of them.
maxcat07
God does not break any covenants so if you chose you would have a house to go to still. No matter how you cut or slice it, the Jewish people cannot erase what Isaish 53, the suffering servant, meant. It was about the Messiah
Isaiah 53 as translated from the Hebrew
by Victor Buksbazen
Isaiah 52:13-15
13. Behold, my servant shall deal wisely, he will rise up, he will be lifted up and be exalted.
14. Even as many were astounded at him, because his appearance was marred more than any man’s and his form more than that of the children of men.
15. So shall he sprinkle many nations; kings will shut their mouths; for what has not been told to them they have seen; and what they have not heard they have understood.
Isaiah 53
1. Who has believed our tidings? And the arm of Jehovah to whom was it revealed?
2. And he sprang up like a tender shoot before him, and as a root from a dry land: he had no form and no beauty; and when we saw him there was no appearance that we might desire him.
3. He was despised and shunned of men; a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief: and as one from whom men hide their faces; thus he was despised and we regarded him not.
4. But he indeed hath borne our diseases, and was burdened with our sorrows; and we considered him stricken, and smitten by God and afflicted.
5. But he was mortally wounded for our transgressions, crushed by our sins; the penalty for our peace was upon him; and by his stripes we are healed.
6. We all have gone astray like sheep; every man turned to his own way; but Jehovah laid upon him the guilt of us all.
7. He was tormented and afflicted, but he opened not his mouth; like a lamb he was led to the slaughter, and like a sheep before her shearers he was dumb, and opened not his mouth.
8. He was taken from prison and from judgment: and of his generation who considered? He was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression of my people the stroke fell upon him.
9. His grave was assigned with the ungodly, and his death with the rich man; and yet he did no wrong and there was no deception in his mouth.
10. Yet it was Jehovah who desired to crush him; he put him to grief. When thou shalt make his soul a trespass-offering he will see his seed, prolong his days, and the desire of Jehovah shall prosper in his hand.
11. He shall look upon his soul’s travail and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall the righteous one my servant justify many; and their iniquities he shall take upon himself.
12. Therefore I will give him a share with the great, and with the mighty he will divide the spoil; because he exposed his soul unto death and was counted with the transgressors; but he carried the sin of many and
http://www.thebookwurm.com/isaiah53.htm
This is a very spiritual article if you are interested
Rcocean
So, in remembrance to Him, Perhaps we can think our introit together
“Christ is Risen From The Dead! He is Risen He is Risen He is Alive
Forevermore!”
The final approval by a majority of the church’s 171 regional bodies, known as presbyteries, enshrines a change recommended last year by the church’s General Assembly. The vote amends the church’s constitution to broaden marriage from being between “a man and a woman” to “two people, traditionally a man and a woman.”
…
Other religious denominations that have officially decided to permit their clergy to perform same-sex marriages include the Episcopal Church, the United Church of Christ, the Quakers, the Unitarian Universalist Association of Churches and, in Judaism, the Reform and Conservative movements. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America left it open for individual ministers to decide.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/robert-schlesinger/2015/03/18/presbyterians-ok-gay-marriage-now-government-should-get-out-of-the-way
Lots of people have prayed over this. I am not the only fool and I am not really a Liberal But a Classical one more along the Father of our Constitution – James Madison – who felt the government should be set up with a system of checks and balances so no branch had greater power over the other. and my Church is very Conservative and this is very hard for them.
I think the 9th Amendment should save us from ourselves eventually if we fight for our rights. (Not just this gay thing of course)
@ Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter
“Right now I am watching the videos from Myles Powers debunking the House of Numbers and your position. I am on Part V of the series, and it is hilarious! This guys is tearing Leung to pieces. You need to watch the debunking videos and stop promulgating your theories because you are going to hurt someone if they listen to you. Here is a link to Part 1, and as each video gets to the end, it gives you the link to the next.
“This is a thorough debunking of a theory as I have ever seen.”
I surmise that you were trying to say, “This is as thorough a debunking of a theory as I have ever seen.”
I’ve had time to watch only the first video “debunking” “House of Numbers,” but if you found it persuasively supportive of the HIV/AIDS hypothesis in any meaningful way, your perceptual filter is conspicuously in evidence.
Powers’ effort is a clumsy, very amateurish attempt at a hatchet job that makes egregious appeals to emotion rather than to scientific evidence. As soon as time permits, I”ll view the other parts of Powers’ diatribe against “House of Numbers” and will address his “documentary” as a whole.
In the meantime, suffice it to say that if the first part of it impressed you positively, you are singularly impressionable and emotionally manipulable, not to mention being scientifically naive.
Thanks again, though, for posting a link to “House of Numbers.” 🙂
Trooper, 500k is almost certainly more than a years gross.
If I may interject some non emotion thoughts. The Constitutional question is really quite simple. Can a person be REQUIRED to participate in an activity against their religious beliefs? In Clay v US, Cassius Clay, aka Muhammad Ali, refused induction by the draft on religious grounds. SCOTUS ruled unanimously in his favor that he could not be compelled to participate in an activity that his religion opposed. Now, the irony does not escape many of us here. Firstly, Ali was the darling of liberals and he became a folk hero for opposing to fight in Viet Nam. “Ain’t no Viet Cong done nuthin’ to me” being the oft heard phrase. The other ironic twist being the assertion Islam not allowing him to kill.
Nick – the fact that most of his opponents had never done anything to him never stopped Cassius Clay from beating the crap out of them.
The GoFundMe for Memories Pizza that was attacked by gay fascists has raised more than $500,000 in donations that were mostly les than $10.
Okay. I see no one has learned yet to love the Lord above all else and their neighbors as themselves yet here.
Okay. How about “judge not, lest ye be judged”? Remember that one?
I love the Lord, but I don’t recall where He commanded his followers to be passive. I love my neighbor as I love myself, but that doesn’t mean that I like what some of my neighbors do, nor that I have to passively accept it.
Sometimes you have to tip over the tables and run the brood of vipers out of the temple, know what I mean?
Michael Haz
I am responding to you because you are the only one making any sense here and are not throwing stone and being emotional.
I consider myself to be Christ Centered. I am not Gay. I have heard a lot about you from my friends on here and it is all good and you are responding to the little I say.
I very much appreciate what you say and you have made valid points however, it seems like both sides of the coin are equally unable to stop being hypocritical because of greed, power and sex.
I have prayed about this and what my concern is that if in fact these laws are passed, the next step will be that the gays will not be served at all.
If the Shopkeeper makes it their policy up front, like the Hobby Lobby and Chick fil It did, that is one thing. But to fill many orders for a couple and then when it comes time for them to marry, to refuse them, that is inconsistent and discrimination and balkanization. Why, one might ask? You cannot serve 2 Gods. God and Mammon. You have to separate them and make up your mind up front what your priorities are and who you want to serve and who you don’t. Right up front.
Then, you will have to take issue with the Gay people right up front. My Church marries them. We take all kinds of crap for it. But hopefully it will end some of the first amendment dilemma in the end
Is that clear sir? 😉
Haz, Great comment. I have said that the test case that goes to SCOTUS should be a Muslim bakery not doing a gay wedding. That will increase the odds of victory. They key, for me anyway, is the First Amendment, not the specific religion. With there being Catholics on SCOTUS, I don’t want the test case to be a Catholic baker. I want it to be a Muslim baker. I love cross rips!
Ace has an excellent page that digs into the pizza restaurant story. The reporter from the television station (1) is a LGBT activist, (2) deliberately went specifically to this restaurant because it has Christian symbolic items on the wall, (3) is also a pro-Palistinian activist. In other words, the reporter is a LWNJ SJW who purposely sought not to report, but to inflame.
Steven Crowder went to multiple Muslim-owned bakeries in Dearborn earlier this week and tried to order a wedding cake for two men getting married. None of the bakeries would take the order. Sadly, there were no young, eager, activist news reporters present. Or willing to do a follow-up interview. Surprised, not.
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgWIhYAtan4&w=560&h=315%5D
Great clip, Haz. This guy was lucky to leave the bakery with all of his appendages.
@Pogo and others:
We were right! And just as I said at 1:17PM above:
And lo and behold! Look what I just read this morning!
http://toprightnewscom.c.presscdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/501c3-gays.jpg
http://toprightnews.com/gay-group-demands-christian-churches-be-shut-down-for-opposing-same-sex-marriage/
Oh, and just for poops and giggles, what did Ingannie say at 12:16PM above when Pogo first started talking about it???:
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
@INLegalEagle
Oh, thank you sooo very much for that! I am glad that I was able to help you get a little relief from the all the madness and insanity!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
This is Jesus tonight
Mark 14:32-42 They went to a place called Gethsemane, and Jesus said to his disciples, “Sit here while I pray.” 33 He took Peter, James and John along with him, and he began to be deeply distressed and troubled. 34 “My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death,” he said to them. “Stay here and keep watch.” 35 Going a little farther, he fell to the ground and prayed that if possible the hour might pass from him. 36 “Abba, Father,” he said, “everything is possible for you. Take this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will.” 37 Then he returned to his disciples and found them sleeping. “Simon,” he said to Peter, “are you asleep? Could you not keep watch for one hour? 38 Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the body is weak.” 39 Once more he went away and prayed the same thing. 40 When he came back, he again found them sleeping, because their eyes were heavy. They did not know what to say to him. 41 Returning the third time, he said to them, “Are you still sleeping and resting? Enough! The hour has come. Look, the Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. 42 Rise! Let us go! Here comes my betrayer!”
We here in hell, otherwise known as Indiana, have apparently gotten a reprieve from the gruesome liberal tolerance, because George Takei said so.
However, this law firm would like to thank Squeeky for the best evening we’ve had this week in the Hoosier State, at least as social media goes. We may start a Squeeky fan club.
Inga, seriously, there are some bright minds here – with their very own brilliant thoughts. Take a breath, stop with the copy/paste and other peoples thoughts, and learn. Just be willing to learn.
Either way, thank you all for the much needed relief………….especially girl reporter.
Sooo, what about Muslim bakeries???
http://louderwithcrowder.com/hidden-camera-gay-wedding-cake-at-muslim-bakery/
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
My goodness, but you people had some tame and innocent childhoods. I used to like Lenore, The Cute Little Dead Girl. who was in comics first, then in cartoons when I was a teenager. Sooo, here is one of her spots, with a moral!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PusCpQIbmCw
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
This Little Rascals used to creep the heck out of me as a kid.
Paul CS – True that. Offerman’s loss. Nature abhors a vacuum! I was wondering if anyone debating this could find the difference that the quote pointed out. I think it is a valid point, and I do not see a difference. Both are parties who made a choice based on ideas they subscribe to. Freedom!
Speaking of baking a cake. . .
Maybe we shouldn’t demand that all people be required to bake for us?
Just sayin’
bam bam, Laughing and joking amongst good folks, and ignoring the drama kings and queens, is the best way to stick around. I was hounded for a couple years. It’s MUCH better than it used to be. But, there will always be trolls trying to create turmoil. C’est la vie.