Wedding Hosts Guilty of Discrimination

[JakeStarkey]

I would love to see, for the most part, all public accommodation laws scrapped at the state and federal level. People shouldn't be forced to do business with other people. I'll gladly take my money elsewhere. Perhaps I'll even open a similar business in your community, cater to all those you won't, and drive you out of business.

As long as you follow the law, go for it.

 

[bodecea]

These people cannot be allowed to do what they want on their own property! They must be punished and re educated.



NY Court: Farmers to Be Re-Educated, Pay Fines for Not Hosting Homosexual Wedding
A couple who hosts occasional wedding ceremonies on their New York farm have lost an appeal to overturn the $13,000 in fines levied against them by the state’s human rights agency, which ruled that their refusal to host a wedding for two women was discriminatory.

On Jan. 14, the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, upheld the agency’s order and the fines, a decision the Alliance Defending Freedom - which represented Robert and Cynthia Gifford - said amounted to confirming, “that the government can punish the Giffords for declining to coordinate a ceremony that conflicts with their conscience.”

The couple lives in a barn they built on their farm and have occasionally hosted weddings on the first floor and the surrounding backyard area, according to ADF.

“After the agency ruled that the Giffords were guilty of ‘sexual orientation discrimination,’ it fined them $10,000, plus $3,000 in damages and ordered them to implement re-education training classes designed to contradict the couple’s religious beliefs about marriage,” a press release issued following the court decision stated.

In order to comply with the order, the couple will have to attend those “re-training” classes or have a “trainer” come to them, according to ADF.

“All Americans should be free to live and work according to their beliefs, especially in our own backyards,” ADF legal counsel Caleb Dalton, who argued before the court on behalf of the couple in Gifford v. Erwin, said in a statement. “The government went after both this couple’s freedom and their ability to make a living simply for adhering to their faith on their own property.

“The court should have rejected this unwarranted and unconstitutional government intrusion, so we will consult with our client regarding appeal,” Dalton said.

ADF attorneys argued that the First Amendment prohibits the government from forcing a wedding coordinator like Cynthia to plan and participate in a ceremony that violates her faith.

“The appeals court decision, however, sidestepped that argument and is allowing the government coercion to continue,” the ADF press release stated.

Sounds like another PA law issue. So, for those not liking this ruling...what have YOU actively been doing to have the PA laws in your state repealed?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Next time...

 

[Debra K]

We are a nation of laws ... laws, laws, laws everywhere. There's a lot of stuff that my hubby and I can't do on our own property. We can't allow our grass to get too high. That would be in violation of civil ordinances and we would have to pay a hefty fine. So we mow our grass. What the hell has America come to? you know, when people can't do whatever they want ...

There are reason for the lawn law in certain jurisdictions, tall dry grass can burn the neighbor's house down too. But there's no reason the prevent people from associating with who they want. If I don't want to serve someone, forcing me to do it isn't good for me or them.

And there are valid reasons for anti-discrimination laws that apply to public accommodations. And offering your property location and catering services for weddings is a public accommodation.

 

[Iceweasel]

We are a nation of laws ... laws, laws, laws everywhere. There's a lot of stuff that my hubby and I can't do on our own property. We can't allow our grass to get too high. That would be in violation of civil ordinances and we would have to pay a hefty fine. So we mow our grass. What the hell has America come to? you know, when people can't do whatever they want ...

There are reason for the lawn law in certain jurisdictions, tall dry grass can burn the neighbor's house down too. But there's no reason the prevent people from associating with who they want. If I don't want to serve someone, forcing me to do it isn't good for me or them.

And there are valid reasons for anti-discrimination laws that apply to public accommodations. And offering your property location and catering services for weddings is a public accommodation.

I have valid reasons to choose who I work for and why. Open to the public does not mean publicly owned. But thanks for another useless post.

 

[turzovka]

If you run a business catering to the public, then you are subject to the law. Break the law, get punished.

Except if you are Hillary Clinton. Or the IRS. Or Barack.
Or unless you are a city and determine you can set up a "safe city" for illegal immigrant criminals.
Or unless you want to cross the border as an illegal immigrant, we will not enforce the law and deport you, we will give you drivers licenses and money we do not have.
Unless you are planned parenthood and the evidence shows a great need for a criminal investigation for selling baby parts. Instead our "law abiding" courts will charge the camera people for using fake drivers licenses and throw out the dastardly crimes being done by PP.
Unless you want to make pot legal and go against our nation's laws.
Unless you want to run an unsanitary, never be able to pass medical inspections and standards, abortion clinics.
Unless you run a high school where a student needs a parental permission slip to take an aspirin, but the school can secretly taxi these parents' daughter off to get a secret abortion and never tell them.

(this list is not exhaustive...)

 

[JakeStarkey]

Fallacy of false equivalency, turzovka

 

[EverCurious]

http://www.adfmedia.org/files/GiffordDecision.pdf