After caving to pressures from major companies like Disney and
Apple that they would boycott his state, Georgia’s Republican Governor Nathan
Deal vetoed a bill that would protect clergy from being forced to perform same-sex
“weddings”.
Though LGBT activists insist they do not want to violate anyone’s
religious freedoms, the vetoed Free Exercise Protection Act (H.B. 757) would
have also specified that religious organizations do not have to rent out their
facilities for such a ceremony, nor do they have to hire anyone if doing so
would violate the group's sincerely held religious beliefs about human
sexuality.
Politicians like Hillary Clinton love to remind Christians that
she supports our “freedom to worship” within church grounds (they don’t ever say they
support our Constitutional freedom of religion, a big difference), but now LGBT
protectionist laws are invading the grounds of the church and
directly seek to force those inside the church to go against their beliefs.
What stands out so vividly here is the power of the dollar. Just
as Indiana lost an estimated $60 million in tourism revenues in the wake of its
Religious Freedom bill episode last year, states like Georgia, North Carolina and others
are facing economic boycotts from major players like the NFL, soft drink companies, airlines,
movie studios and the like. Facing economic losses of this magnitude, governors
are trembling under the powerful hand of Big Business, which itself trembles under the power of the consumer, especially the 18-34 demographic, the group most likely to support LGBT legislation despite, perhaps unbeknownst to them, that such legislation is increasingly at the expense of religious rights. Businesses are of course fearful of mass boycotts by this group and other consumers.
But consider what might happen if governors of all 50 states
were to face similar religious freedom legislation and didn’t cower to economic threats. For
every state that signed Religious Freedom bills into law that simply protect
private citizens from being forced to violate their faith (or in North Carolina’s
case, to protect citizens from sharing a public restroom with someone who could
be pretending to identify as a different gender) some economic loss may occur
at the onset. For instance, the NFL may have moved the Super Bowl out of Georgia to another state had Deal signed the bill.
Yes, that would be a big loss initially for Georgia.
But as state after state were to sign into law basic religious
protections (which simply enforce the Constitution, by the way), the NFL is going to still want to have a Super Bowl. Apple is still going to want to sell phones everywhere. Disney will still want to make movies. What would these organizations do if all 50 states had religious freedom bills?
Maybe if governors stiffened their spines and stood up against economic bullying, eventually the bullies would back down. After all, it's not cheap to relocate headquarters, and companies no longer offering their products or services in a state would take a big revenue hit as well.
As for consumer boycotts, perhaps it's up to Christians to not let the few control what most of us believe to be a violation of the Constitution. Imagine if all Christians and supporters of religious freedom were to stop using the products or services of companies that didn't support religious rights. I bet it wouldn't be long before these companies reversed their positions. In other words, let's use the power of the dollar to work for freedom, not against it.
On the other hand, keep in mind what happened when Chick-fil-A was hounded because its founder voiced support for traditional marriage. Mass boycotts were called - but supporters outnumbered the boycotters and record sales were made. In other words, maybe businesses should look more closely at how mass amounts of Americans actually feel about the issue before voicing their threats to depart.
If the businesses did make good on their word, though, and left the state in question, at the very least, it would create an opening for entrepreneurs who would be more than willing to take on the market share for products and services abandoned by businesses who don’t want to fight for religious freedom.
Maybe if governors stiffened their spines and stood up against economic bullying, eventually the bullies would back down. After all, it's not cheap to relocate headquarters, and companies no longer offering their products or services in a state would take a big revenue hit as well.
As for consumer boycotts, perhaps it's up to Christians to not let the few control what most of us believe to be a violation of the Constitution. Imagine if all Christians and supporters of religious freedom were to stop using the products or services of companies that didn't support religious rights. I bet it wouldn't be long before these companies reversed their positions. In other words, let's use the power of the dollar to work for freedom, not against it.
On the other hand, keep in mind what happened when Chick-fil-A was hounded because its founder voiced support for traditional marriage. Mass boycotts were called - but supporters outnumbered the boycotters and record sales were made. In other words, maybe businesses should look more closely at how mass amounts of Americans actually feel about the issue before voicing their threats to depart.
If the businesses did make good on their word, though, and left the state in question, at the very least, it would create an opening for entrepreneurs who would be more than willing to take on the market share for products and services abandoned by businesses who don’t want to fight for religious freedom.
It's of course an overly simplistic speculation, but as I see it, it could be a win-win for both religious freedom and capitalism - the very two things that helped make America great in the first place.
No one has the right to discriminate in America. Then you rap it in religion to drive it home. You are the bullie Julie, have been doing just that to the LGBTQ community ever since you wrote your first comments as you put it "to start a dialog on same sex marriage" You had no good intention in your heart when you wrote that column. You set out to discredit gays and mislead your reader then and you do it everytime you say doing a persons job, has something to do with condoning maraige equality.
ReplyDeleteSo you believe a Christian pastor should be forced to perform a same-sex marriage in his church, despite his religious beliefs on marriage as defined by God, not man. Of course it has to do with religion. As for what's in Julie's heart, nobody has the right to question what's in someone's conscience. But again, the sexualists don't care about conscience rights. They only care about their own rights. What you do privately is between you and God. But when you bring in other people and force them to play even a small role in it against their will, it is discriminating against religious people who don't share your rejection of God's teachings. Simply stop asking them to celebrate your sexuality as you see fit because according to the Bible, which says REPEATEDLY that homosexual activity is a sin, taking part in anything sinful by supporting something sinful makes the person supporting it guilty of sin. So yes, asking them to perform a homosexual "marriage" is asking them to partake in something sinful. Just respect a Christian's right to not want to do anything they know will make them guilty of sin. Christians are NOT telling you to stop having sex with the same gender. Respect their rights too. By the way, thank you, Julie for talking about the important topics that need to be talked about!
DeleteHey, Mark, why are you reading (again) and commenting (again)? Just last week you wrote that “reading Julie isn’t worth my time”. I’m glad to see that her column IS worth your time! Welcome aboard!
DeleteOh, come on Paul. Don't you know that "Anonymous" is his alter ego and therefore that does not count. ha ha
DeleteAnonymous, Though I believe that everyone has the right to their opinion. A person as yourself also can be construed as a bigot and a hypocrite by using dialect such as rap and bully (not bullie). Not everyone has to pick a side. Do I believe in gay marriage absolutely. Do I feel a Christian Church has to perform the ceremony, no. Should companies be allowed to refuse service or sell goods to LGBTQ citizens because of religious beliefs, no. What I do believe in is respect for all individuals. It is ok to agree to disagree but provide statements with proof and common sense without name calling. This ensures a mature ability to provide comments.
DeleteI worked hard as a florist for many years designing wedding flowers. I enjoyed the work I was paid to do. I never felt I was celebrating in the couples joy. The couple had no significance, the church only mattered as a location to make the delivery. the design, execution and style was all that mattered, a job well done, another thankful couple. I don't understand how a worker becomes a part of the wedding by doing a job. It all seems like a excuse to fight. God gave me talent He never said I should only give to hetrosexuals.
DeleteOne other thing. If I made a birthday arrangement for a homosexual would that be like celebrating a gays mans life? Or a get well arrangement for a gay AIDS patient is that going against your Gods will?
Delete“I don’t understand how a worker becomes a part of the wedding by doing a job”????
DeleteA worker might not be on the guest list, but he or she is undoubtedly lending their support to the occasion. That’s indisputable. Right? A Christian may not want to be forced to participate in the celebration of sin (i.e. a same-sex “wedding”), which means that a photographer, florist, baker, etc. should have the freedom to excuse themselves from that participation.
A few weeks ago, during one of the GOP debates, John Kasich was asked about that exact scenario. Here’s his response:
“If you go to a photographer to take pictures at your wedding, and he says, I’d rather not do it, find another photographer, don’t sue them in court. You know what, the problem is in our country – in our country, we need to learn to respect each other and be a little bit more tolerant for one another.”
Many in the LGBT community not only do not want to adopt that kind of mindset, but will, in fact, specifically target businesses that are known to hold to traditional marriage, even though they know there are plenty of other retailers more than willing to accommodate them. I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again - for many in the LGBT community, this is much more about silencing opposition to the homosexual agenda than it is about gaining “rights”.
This is crap I do my work, I get paid. You people can keek all this fighting. I know lots of people like this, gay, good people. They deserve things too. When I came to this counter I had more then they do. You know people who got sued by gays, personally. Something is wrong here. Your wrong Mr Paul. Do the work, get padded. No celebration for workers.
DeleteYou’re responding on a purely emotional level. Step back and try to look at this objectively. As a Christian, I would stand up for many other people who shouldn’t be forced to go against their deeply help convictions/beliefs. A Muslim-operated poster shop shouldn’t be forced to produce images of Muhammad, a Jewish barber shouldn’t be forced to carve a swastika sign when giving a neo-Nazi a buzz cut, a photographer shouldn’t be forced to photograph nude people, etc., etc.
DeleteWhy can’t you adopt Kasich’s mindset? If you walk into a bakery, and the Christian baker doesn’t want to provide a cake with images of two men getting “married”, then find another bakery store –there are plenty!! The LGBT community needs to stop the “entire world needs to accept homosexual activity as good, normal, and honorable, otherwise we’ll raise hell” campaign.
Lot of things you don like. Lot of thing I don like. You are in America. You do the law. You do your job. Customers always right. What about birthday flowers to celebrate gay man birthday. I asked question, you didn't answer that question.
Delete“You are in America. You do the law.” If that’s the case, then why is the LGBT community so outraged by North Carolina’s new, common sense, law that restricts men from using women’s facilities, and vice versa? Why isn’t the LGBT community willing to abide by that law? Aren’t they “in America”?
Delete“Birthday flowers to celebrate gay man birthday”? A birthday is a birthday. How would anyone know if the flowers were meant for a gay or straight man? It’s not necessarily a celebration of sin. On the other hand, if flowers were requested to “celebrate” someone’s homosexual lifestyle, then obviously there might be Christian florists who’d want to excuse themselves from that.
You all messed up Mr Paul I don't get you. I think you not a very nice man.
DeleteCan you explain, specifically, why you think I’m “messed up”?
DeleteEntire companies are threatening to pull out of North Carolina because Governor McCrory refused to risk the safety of his entire state for less than one half of one percent of the country's population. And, it turns out, he may have done more to protect the people who identify as transgendered than most liberals have. Just recently a transgendered woman was raped in one of these new unisex bathrooms — at an LGBT landmark no less =--the Stonewall Inn in New York City, the liberals' monument to 'tolerance,'. Even here, these policies are hurting the people they were designed to 'help!' Considering most young people struggling with transgenderism eventually move on, the question has to be asked: What's the objective in over throwing the freedoms of the majority for such a small few? Julie is right that we need to stop caving in to these threats by major corporations to leave a state or whatnot and stand up for not only religious rights but the safety of people everywhere, straight or gay. Common sense really needs to make a comeback in our country.
ReplyDeleteSo now you have a bunch of women who are now trans men. They look just like men.Their birth certificate reads femail. They were born femail. They must use the women's bathroom. Now you have the same thing only in reverse. How can women tell the trans man from the straight mail rapist the conservative law makers are so worried about?
DeleteA woman CANNOT “transition” into a man (and vice versa) any more than a human being can “transition” into an animal. A male will always remain male, and a female will always remain female regardless of the outward clothing or the extent of any surgical procedures. Many in our society who are buying into this “gender fluidity” nonsense are either losing their minds, or are so politically correct and timid that they’re unwilling to challenge anything that is so patently absurd. Certainly, people who think or feel that they’re “transitioning” need to be dealt with compassionately, but we also need to recognize that these are psychological (and spiritual) issues.
DeleteAny way you cut it because of the North Carolina lack of understanding, your going to see what looks like men and women in the same restrooms.
DeleteWhat's a matter Mr Paul...cat got your...
DeleteCelebrating a homosexual's birthday by baking a cake for his party is not endorsing sin because being born is not a sin, nor is celebrating that birthday. God created all of us. But when we cross the line and do things God does say is a sin, like act on homosexual attraction and pretend it's marriage and ask a baker to bake a cake to help celebrate it, yes, now it has crossed over into sin. The birthday or get well cake are poor examples. Please try again if you can.
DeleteWho made you so smart Dan.
ReplyDeleteGod created me gay, I was born gay. When I celebrate my birthday its as a gay man. Being a sexually active gay man is not your business. Jesus Christ denied himself of all sin. God did not create me only to denied my self. That would be some joke on me. Your not here to tell me anything. You don't know what marriage is to me, or what I believe sin is. Take care you can stand the test. Don't judge me judge yourself. Get your own house in order. Believe as you wish Dan. Don't tell me how to think like you I'm not you Dan. And I never forced anyone to provide services for my wedding, they gave from their heart freely. I would never have anything to do with an objector. So stop thinking all gay people are out to get you. That are not, I am not.
I just read the Bible, that's all. It's all there in black and white. And true, your being homosexual is not my business. No homosexual's life is any of our business, but I do believe it is not loving to just pretend that active homosexuality is not a sin as stated repeatedly in the Bible, because sin brings condemnation on the soul - and because I love my neighbor, I would not want anyone to be in sin whatever the form of sin. It is not just singling out homosexuals. It includes adulterers, thieves, idolaters, etc. We are all sinners in some way but I would not want anyone to help me be active in my sin or celebrate it in any way. I would want them to lovingly inform me that it's not good for my soul. But homosexuals don't want to hear that. They call it hate automatically. And then they say "stay out of our lives!". Ok, fine. But that is why no homosexual should try to force any of us to help celebrate it. Can't have it both ways (e.g. leave us alone, but hey, endorse us against your beliefs!) And sorry, but God calls ALL of us to be chaste, regardless of our state in life. Even within valid Holy Matrimony, God admonishes against unchaste behavior. And for un-married people (as in Holy Matrimony, not man-made "marriage") no sexual activity is supposed to take place, no matter how badly one might desire it. Jesus definitely says if you want to follow Him, you have to DENY yourself. And nobody said you were forcing people to bake a darn cake. But others are. That's what this conversation is about. It's not about you personally as much as you'd like to make it be about you. Wee are all supposed to follow God and not be asked to ignore His teachings for someone else's demands. That's what others are doing, and even if you yourself have never "forced" someone to bake a cake, you don't seem to have a problem with the fact that others are doing just that and now even clergy are not being protected from being forced to perform the God-less "marriage" ceremony. Maybe you wouldn't force a pastor to do that, but would you speak up in defense of the pastor who didn't want to have to do it?
DeleteAnd keep in mind, the pastor's number one job is to save souls...not help condemn them. So the argument that the pastor should "just do his job" in terms of marrying people in a Godless way is moot.
DeleteFOR STARTERS, READ THIS DAN, THIS IS WHY LGBTQ get so mad at people like you. You make it all up so you have a reason to hate us. Its all falsehoods. None of the Religious Right’s arguments against marriage equality are particularly strong, but some are much worse than others.
DeleteHere’s the weakest one: Clergy will be forced to officiate at same-sex weddings. The far right has been shopping this one around since Massachusetts became the first state to allow same-sex marriage in 2004. That was 11 years ago. How many members of the clergy in Massachusetts have been forced to perform marriages for same-sex couples since then? How many have been fined or are sitting in prison for refusing?
Zero. Zilch. None.
The First Amendment to the Constitution guarantees, among other things, the “free exercise” of religion. This means the government can’t interfere in purely religious functions or dictate how faith groups handle sacraments or to whom they offer them.
So then why the anger against a law that would simply reaffirm that people shouldn't have to violate their religious beliefs by partaking in same-sex ceremonies in any shape or form? It is not the govt's duty to inform us of our beliefs. Am moving on from this now - you may have the last word.
DeleteBecause THE LGBTQ community has been told how to act for 100s of years. By people like you. I don't care about sueing, but I understand why people do. Bigitry is your answer.
DeleteFor hundreds of years, Bible-believing Christians have repeatedly warned people to turn from all kinds of sexual sins, including homosexual activity. That’s not “bigotry”. That’s actually one of the most loving things that a Christian can do. Think of it this way: if you had the cure for cancer, would you not want to share it with the rest of the world? How much greater is the need to warn unrepentant people about the eternal consequences of sin?
DeleteI don't get a chance to be on my own blog as often as I would like to, but thank you, Paul, not only for the truth, but for your unwavering patience and respect in presenting it. God bless you.
Delete