Can The Govt FORCE You To Promote A Choice That Goes Against Your Religion? The Fight Continues...

easyt65

Diamond Member
Aug 4, 2015
90,307
61,235
2,645
Two Christian Artists Who Refuse to Serve Gay Weddings Are Likely Heading to Court to Battle the Government — but There’s a Twist

Phoenix City Code 18.4(B):
"No person shall, directly or indirectly, refuse, withhold from, or deny to any person, or aid in or incite such refusal, denial or withholding of, accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges thereof because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or disability nor shall distinction be made with respect to any person based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or disability in connection with the price or quality of any item, goods or services offered by or at any place of public accommodation."

According to the local government in Phoenix City your personal religious freedom can be overridden by the government, and you can be forced - as a Christian - to engage in activities that violate your religious beliefs. IMO that is a clear violation of the Constitution. (And you know d@mn-well the government would not try to apply this to Muslims for fear of 'offending them...but Christians are 'fair game'.)

Unlike other cases that have been in the news, though, these people / this business has NOT been sued or fined for refusing service for same-sex events....but they are probably still heading to court. Instead, 'Joanna Duka and Breanna Koski, owners of art company Brush & Nib, have filed a lawsuit against the city of Phoenix, Arizona' over the 'non-discrimination law' (above) 'that they claim violates their religious rights'.

"“Although the two young women happily create art for everyone regardless of sexual orientation, Phoenix interprets its law to require them to create art for events, like same-sex wedding ceremonies, that are completely at odds with their religious beliefs,” the lawyer wrote. “Phoenix also interprets its law to prevent them from explaining their religious beliefs and why they must create art consistent with their beliefs.”

"“Joanna and Breanna are exposing the pre-existing tension between Phoenix’s law and their constitutionally protected freedoms, between the right to speak and create freely and the government’s attempt to crush dissent and command conformity,” Scruggs continued. “And that is precisely what’s at stake.”


The company's owners are standing up for Christians / Christianity and is taking the fight to the city of Phoenix before anyone can bring the fight to them.

Go get 'em, girls!
 
If your religion prohibits you from adhering to public accommodation laws then you shouldn't have a business.

It's no different than a Muslim applying for a job in a bacon store and then saying he can't touch bacon because of his stupid religion
 
If your religion prohibits you from adhering to public accommodation laws then you shouldn't have a business.

It's no different than a Muslim applying for a job in a bacon store and then saying he can't touch bacon because of his stupid religion

Not bacon. Everybody loves bacon!
 
If your religion prohibits you from adhering to public accommodation laws then you shouldn't have a business.

It's no different than a Muslim applying for a job in a bacon store and then saying he can't touch bacon because of his stupid religion
I completely disagree. The Constitution protects my religious freedom. If you are a LGBT and want some artwork done, your desire for that artwork does not supersede my religious freedom. I do not impose my religious beliefs on you, and you do not try to force me to do something that violates my religious beliefs.

"I reserve the right to NOT provide a service." This actually was once an acceptable sign / practice for businesses, but Liberals seek to impose their will on others, IMO. It isn't just about getting LGBT 'accepted' as a norm, but they are also trying to FORCE others to 'participate in/support it', even if it is against their religious beliefs that are protected UN-CONDITIONALLY under the Constitution.

There are other artists who would gladly take your business. There are other bakeries that would gladly take your business. But that's not good enough. 'THAT' one refuses to do so, so we MUST FORCE them to do so against their will. While 'I' may not want to support your lifestyle / choices due to 'my' religious beliefs 'I' respect your right to be a LGBT and to have rights, 'you' demonstrate 'you' have no respect for 'my' religious beliefs and Constitutional Rights.

'Evil' (as I define in this saying as someone who wants to impose their will on others) teaches 'tolerance' until they are in a position to oppress, silence, and eliminate any opposition to their beliefs."
- We are seeing that today more and more. This oppression of Constitutionally protected rights of religious freedom, to me, is an example of that.

I also believe you and I may disagree on this issue, and that is ok....
 
Two more "Christians", breaking the law.

The laws of Jesusland are not the same as the laws of the USA. Just for starters, our law is not an eye for an eye either.
The Constitutionality of the law has not been determined, and since no charges have been pressed and they have not been found guilty of anything they therefore have not technically 'broken any law'.
 
If your religion prohibits you from adhering to public accommodation laws then you shouldn't have a business.

It's no different than a Muslim applying for a job in a bacon store and then saying he can't touch bacon because of his stupid religion
No, it's more like a Muslim demanding a business that sells bacon STOP selling bacon. (of course there have been cases already where businesses have actually decided to stop selling pork products to appease Muslims.)
 
giphy (1).gif
 
Here is my opinion:

Should any Christian, Muslim, Jewish or any other Religious business be forced to serve someone that is against their religion?

No, and I will get my ass handed to me for this but read further.

Your religious rights under the Constitution should be honored unless amended by the Federal Government through an Constitutional Amendment or by a ruling by the USSC on the subject matter at hand...

Now here is the twist you will most likely disagree with and that is your religious right end with you and should not be enforced unto me. I have every right to service the gay community by offering weddings, baked cakes, and photographs of their wedding and no you should not use your religion to prevent me for having a business to offer those services and more.

Now I am sure you will claim you would not attempt to stop me but the reality is your side would and try to enforce your religious nonsense onto me because you believe this Country should be a Christian Nation rules by Christian Laws and that is where I split with your religious freedom and rights because again your religious freedom extends to you and only you and should not be forced upon others that do not share the same view even if you are the damn majority.

The minority segments of our society should have the same equal rights and should not be oppressed by bigoted individuals because your religion give you that right.

I mean would you want Muslims to use your way of thinking to enforce Muslim ways of life onto you?

Of course not, so accept you have rights and so does everyone else and your bigotry end at you and shall never be imposed onto me!
 
If your religion prohibits you from adhering to public accommodation laws then you shouldn't have a business.

It's no different than a Muslim applying for a job in a bacon store and then saying he can't touch bacon because of his stupid religion

You're right. It is no different. And just as the bacon store is under no obligation to accommodate the religious preferences of the Muslim applicant, bakers should be under no obligation to accommodate the sexual preferences of potential customers.
 
If your religion prohibits you from adhering to public accommodation laws then you shouldn't have a business.

It's no different than a Muslim applying for a job in a bacon store and then saying he can't touch bacon because of his stupid religion

You're right. It is no different. And just as the bacon store is under no obligation to accommodate the religious preferences of the Muslim customer, bakers should be under no obligation to accommodate the sexual preferences of potential customers.

How are they accommodating their sex preferences ? Are they banging on the dinner table ?
 
If your religion prohibits you from adhering to public accommodation laws then you shouldn't have a business.

It's no different than a Muslim applying for a job in a bacon store and then saying he can't touch bacon because of his stupid religion

You're right. It is no different. And just as the bacon store is under no obligation to accommodate the religious preferences of the Muslim customer, bakers should be under no obligation to accommodate the sexual preferences of potential customers.

How are they accommodating their sex preferences ? Are they banging on the dinner table ?

Doesn't matter. It's a matter of personal conscience. Unless there's some kind of contractual obligation, no one should be forced to serve others against their will.
 
If your religion prohibits you from adhering to public accommodation laws then you shouldn't have a business.

It's no different than a Muslim applying for a job in a bacon store and then saying he can't touch bacon because of his stupid religion

there is a difference between a person who agrees to be an EMPLOYEE but refuses to
do what he has been employed to do---and
a person selling his own services. The artists are not the PAID EMPLOYEES of the people who hire their services until they agree to
DO THE SERVICE. Your analogy is silly
 
If your religion prohibits you from adhering to public accommodation laws then you shouldn't have a business.

It's no different than a Muslim applying for a job in a bacon store and then saying he can't touch bacon because of his stupid religion

there is a difference between a person who agrees to be an EMPLOYEE but refuses to
do what he has been employed to do---and
a person selling his own services. The artists are not the PAID EMPLOYEES of the people who hire their services until they agree to
DO THE SERVICE. Your analogy is silly

I should add-----the EMPLOYEE can quit if he does not like the job.
 
If your religion prohibits you from adhering to public accommodation laws then you shouldn't have a business.

It's no different than a Muslim applying for a job in a bacon store and then saying he can't touch bacon because of his stupid religion

Skull Pilot: So you are saying nobody can run a bacon store business?
Because if a Muslim applies, they'd have to set aside their personal beliefs to work there? What?

NOTE: Skull Pilot I am thanking your msg as Informative because you came up with a great example and argument. How many Muslims are suing a bacon business because they won't change their business to accommodate them by not selling bacon. That really drives the point home. Good job on that! Is this what you meant, were you being sarcastic or serious?
 

Forum List

Back
Top