emilynghiem
Constitutionalist / Universalist
In response to the continuing pushing back and forth over discrimination policies (after NC passed a bill banning expansion of anti-discrimination laws to apply toward orientation/gender, and after the bill signed in MS),
here is a post I sent to a Christian baker in MISSISSIPPI who spoke on public radio contesting the unintended consequences of the new bill that would open the door for abuse to discriminate beyond protection of religious freedom:
Hi Mitchell: I heard you on NPR news this morning. I am a Constitutionalist who argues that "beliefs" on both sides should be equally protected and kept out of govt except where people agree on policy, so it remains inclusive and doesn't take one side over another. I believe the issue of service should not be based on 'belief' but whether the two parties can or cannot reconcile their given beliefs. The *conflict* is the culprit. If people cannot resolve their conflict without a lawsuit, they should agree not to do business together so it's mutual. Not because of one belief or another, but because the two beliefs clash with each other and aren't either side's fault for believing that way. I would like to help you and other Christians and Constitutionalists write out a waiver for businesses to sign with customers, that if they cannot resolve their disputes amicable "for whatever reason, including conflicting beliefs" the two sides AGREE to refrain from conducting business together to avoid legal action, costs or expense to the public. I hope we can work together to write a neutral policy, and quit this ugly bickering back and forth where people cannot help having different beliefs. Either agree to resolve differences, or to stay separate from each other and quit imposing. Thanks I hope this helps!
By the time I sent this, I already received this Open Letter from the Texas Pastor Council to the MS Governor:
April 5, 2016
View this email in your browser
April 5, 2016
Honorable Phil Bryant
Governor, State of Mississippi
P.O. Box 139
Jackson, MS 39205
Dear Governor Bryant:
On behalf of the “Houston Five” pastors who were subpoenaed for seventeen categories of information including sermon materials by our former Mayor for opposing her “Bathroom Ordinance”, as well as hundreds of pastors throughout Texas of every racial and denominational background, I want to thank you for your courageous, principled leadership in signing HB 1523 as well as to encourage you to stay the course. The threats via what we call “corporate terrorism” by these amoral business interests like PayPal to inflict economic harm against those of us defending our basic freedom, public safety and our religious liberty fell short in Houston as our response was, “Our freedom is not for sale!”
As you know, the Final Four of the NCAA was just held in Houston and the radical LGBT movement’s threat to get this event, the Super Bowl, conferences and corporate bases out of Houston was shown to be a paper tiger and the raw use of intimidation. The churches and concerned citizens by the thousands refused to bow to the god of political correctness, the terrible ordinance was defeated overwhelmingly by the people and Houston continues to grow.
First and foremost, the economic blessings we enjoy and work toward in this nation are only possible in a society that honors God, basic moral virtues which produce strong families raising children who thrive in a safe home, safe community and public facilities free from predators. Your and the Mississippi legislature’s actions will preserve and protect the innocent rather than catering to a tiny segment of the population who need healing from their confusion. Thank you!
The greedy, self-serving corporations and professional sports organizations who are threatening Georgia, North Carolina and assuredly will Mississippi as well, do not have the right to dictate the values of the citizens in the communities or states in which they do business. As they continue to attempt to bully “We the People”, it is more important than ever that we have leaders like you who will do what is right versus what is expedient. May the Lord bless and honor you along with all who stand with you!
Sincerely,
Rev. Dave Welch
President, Texas Pastor Council
==========
I am one of the few progressive Democrats who makes the Constitutionalist argument that beliefs on both sides should be protected and represented equally in any public policy, or to mediate and keep these issues in private so there is no conflict or bias in policy, or cost of legal or legislative problems, imposed on the public.
Does anyone else out there support a RESOLUTION to separate political beliefs on this issue and ban any more legislation, ordinances, rulings or govt actions except by consensus of the people represented.
Do we need to give people permission to BAN people from conducting business together if they can't resolve their religious or political beliefs? How do we address the CONFLICT between clashing beliefs as the culprit, instead of blaming the people, one side or the other? Why can't the "existence of an unresolvable CONFLICT" be the basis of a MUTUAL agreement not to conduct business together, so the "discrimination" is mutual and agreed to by both sides.
here is a post I sent to a Christian baker in MISSISSIPPI who spoke on public radio contesting the unintended consequences of the new bill that would open the door for abuse to discriminate beyond protection of religious freedom:
Hi Mitchell: I heard you on NPR news this morning. I am a Constitutionalist who argues that "beliefs" on both sides should be equally protected and kept out of govt except where people agree on policy, so it remains inclusive and doesn't take one side over another. I believe the issue of service should not be based on 'belief' but whether the two parties can or cannot reconcile their given beliefs. The *conflict* is the culprit. If people cannot resolve their conflict without a lawsuit, they should agree not to do business together so it's mutual. Not because of one belief or another, but because the two beliefs clash with each other and aren't either side's fault for believing that way. I would like to help you and other Christians and Constitutionalists write out a waiver for businesses to sign with customers, that if they cannot resolve their disputes amicable "for whatever reason, including conflicting beliefs" the two sides AGREE to refrain from conducting business together to avoid legal action, costs or expense to the public. I hope we can work together to write a neutral policy, and quit this ugly bickering back and forth where people cannot help having different beliefs. Either agree to resolve differences, or to stay separate from each other and quit imposing. Thanks I hope this helps!
By the time I sent this, I already received this Open Letter from the Texas Pastor Council to the MS Governor:
April 5, 2016
View this email in your browser
April 5, 2016
Honorable Phil Bryant
Governor, State of Mississippi
P.O. Box 139
Jackson, MS 39205
Dear Governor Bryant:
On behalf of the “Houston Five” pastors who were subpoenaed for seventeen categories of information including sermon materials by our former Mayor for opposing her “Bathroom Ordinance”, as well as hundreds of pastors throughout Texas of every racial and denominational background, I want to thank you for your courageous, principled leadership in signing HB 1523 as well as to encourage you to stay the course. The threats via what we call “corporate terrorism” by these amoral business interests like PayPal to inflict economic harm against those of us defending our basic freedom, public safety and our religious liberty fell short in Houston as our response was, “Our freedom is not for sale!”
As you know, the Final Four of the NCAA was just held in Houston and the radical LGBT movement’s threat to get this event, the Super Bowl, conferences and corporate bases out of Houston was shown to be a paper tiger and the raw use of intimidation. The churches and concerned citizens by the thousands refused to bow to the god of political correctness, the terrible ordinance was defeated overwhelmingly by the people and Houston continues to grow.
First and foremost, the economic blessings we enjoy and work toward in this nation are only possible in a society that honors God, basic moral virtues which produce strong families raising children who thrive in a safe home, safe community and public facilities free from predators. Your and the Mississippi legislature’s actions will preserve and protect the innocent rather than catering to a tiny segment of the population who need healing from their confusion. Thank you!
The greedy, self-serving corporations and professional sports organizations who are threatening Georgia, North Carolina and assuredly will Mississippi as well, do not have the right to dictate the values of the citizens in the communities or states in which they do business. As they continue to attempt to bully “We the People”, it is more important than ever that we have leaders like you who will do what is right versus what is expedient. May the Lord bless and honor you along with all who stand with you!
Sincerely,
Rev. Dave Welch
President, Texas Pastor Council
==========
I am one of the few progressive Democrats who makes the Constitutionalist argument that beliefs on both sides should be protected and represented equally in any public policy, or to mediate and keep these issues in private so there is no conflict or bias in policy, or cost of legal or legislative problems, imposed on the public.
Does anyone else out there support a RESOLUTION to separate political beliefs on this issue and ban any more legislation, ordinances, rulings or govt actions except by consensus of the people represented.
Do we need to give people permission to BAN people from conducting business together if they can't resolve their religious or political beliefs? How do we address the CONFLICT between clashing beliefs as the culprit, instead of blaming the people, one side or the other? Why can't the "existence of an unresolvable CONFLICT" be the basis of a MUTUAL agreement not to conduct business together, so the "discrimination" is mutual and agreed to by both sides.
