Sunday, April 5, 2015

"Religious conservatives are the targets of discrimination, lawyer says"

"Religious conservatives are the ones being discriminated against for their stance of conscience." said Jordan Lawrence a veteran attorney who in 2006 represented a female photographer in one of the cases widely cited in the “religious freedom" law.
“Nobody has a religion that says they have to deny service to gay people, the way the other side portrays this issue,” he said. “That completely distorts reality and makes this seem like a segregated lunch counter in the South.”

He added: “I’ve had a long time to ponder this and I can’t think of a single person who has said ‘My religion says I can’t sell goods and services to gay people.’ Nobody.”

What some are saying, he insisted, is that they cannot be a party to a ceremony in which marriage is defined differently than between one man and one woman—or serve as an advocate for such a marriage.

People such as website designers, videographers, social media specialists and advertising agencies that devise campaigns—if asked to advocate political or religious platforms— have a right under the law to decline

“They don’t have a standard product – it’s a message they have to formulate to put out there, but people want to ignore the fact that asking a [Christian] website designer to create a website that God does not exist could create some crisis of conscience.”

The threshold for denying services in a religious protection case, he said, is whether the task required by the religious person is “expressive.” Does the job involve some sort of creativity?
Here, Jordan Lawrence cites a couple of instances, one, which made it's way to the New Mexico Supreme court, where a concurrence accompanying the court’s opinion, one of the justices wrote that the Huguenins (a photographer) “now are compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives,” adding “it is the price of citizenship.”

The second instance, an example where this time a governor was singled out for her Christian belief, did not go to the courts, but it did make the news.
In 2012, Sante Fe, N.M., hair stylist Antonio Darden made news when he said he would no longer cut the hair of Gov. Susana Martinez—or offer her the secret hair coloring recipe he designed just for her—because he disagreed with her opposition to gay marriage. Although his stand did not involve a religious protection law, Lorence used the anecdote to make a point.

“The governor’s aides called not too long ago, wanting another appointment to come in,” Darden, who is gay, told a local television station at the time, "Because of her stances and her views on this, I told her aides no. They called the next day, asking if I’d changed my mind about taking the governor in and I said no.”

Lorence said the media rallied behind Darden.

“The stories said ‘Wow, what a principled guy. They treated him like a hero because the governor violated his beliefs,” Lorence said — and the fervor caught on.

“Waiters and waitresses in the area vowed not to provide service to the governor if she came in to eat because of her stance on same-sex marriage,” he said.

Lorence believes laws that protect religious convictions are in place for a reason, and should not be politicized.

“Because this hairdresser was on the right side of the political debate, he got a pass in the press,” he said. “It’s wrong to view religious liberty laws as a fortress of the conservatives, that if you wipe out laws protecting religious liberty you’ve somehow seized a strategic stronghold of the enemy and brought them closer to defeat.”

Reached at his shop, Dardon told the Los Angeles Times that he had every right to deny service.
How can the hairdresser not see that it is HE who is singling out people, indeed punishing the governor for her Christian beliefs?

12 comments:

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

The thought occurred to me the other day that a solution all this mess is to decommission religious institutions from performing legally recognized marriage ceremonies. I mean, you need a license from the government in the first place, anyway, don't you? Religious institutions are agents of the government authorized to make it official. That's the way I understand it, anyway.

So what happens? If you want your marriage to be a legally binding thing, then you go to a magistrate or a judge or a sea captain or some other secular authority to make it official and then a whole bunch of legal rights and obligations kick in.

You can go to a religious institution to get married "in the sight of God," if that's your thing, but don't expect the government to grant you a divorce or alimony or anything if a religious-institution marriage is all you've got.

I must be overlooking something painfully obvious because I just dabble in these sorts of things and surely there's a reason why such a simple idea would satisfy no one.

Sometimes I like being naïve.

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

Speaking of naïve, I had an interesting encounter with a little girl yesterday. She's a little over 4 1/2 years old. I'll keep it short. Promise.

She was visiting our house with her family for Easter dinner. There was a lot of hustle and bustle and I decided to separate myself from the noise and commotion. I was sitting in a quiet room, in a comfy chair, and I was alone except I had a cat on my lap.

The little girl came in, and she asked me why she had yet to see one of our cats, a little fellow who was as outgoing as outgoing can be. She wanted to know where he was.

We spoke together for a little while, and I thought it best not to give her a direct answer to one of her questions. Our conversation ended, as follows:

LITTLE GIRL: Then he's in heaven with God.

ME: I sure hope so, sweetheart. I sure hope so.


Happy Easter, everyone!

Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...

It's ok to discriminate against Christians. The leftwingers say so.

Lem Vibe Bandit said...

Had a back and forth on twitter with a guy about this and I think I came out on top.

oh no, here comes Trooper ;)

Aridog said...

I am so sick of this new gay and LGBT crap. I've had Gay friends, and Lesbian friends, off and on, for over 50 years...and just cannot understand this "new" agenda. What is the point?

BTW...there really is a difference between serving anyone in an public accommodation setting versus participating in a ceremony off site that one disagrees with....and no law can demand it.

Just "delivery" to an off site spot, maybe (if you offer "delivery" within the geography limits of your store) ... but making yourself part of the celebration, personally or by way of special decorations on your product, is not required.

Man, all y'all want to fight a war, join the Marines or Army and go at it. Otherwise STFU.

Aridog said...

Eric...when I got married long ago (first time) I had a sectarian civil ceremony (Buddhist/Confucian more or less), a city hall ritual, and then, because it was required, a US Embassy ritual in order to document everything.

No church is an agent of the government...but government can designate religious figures to certify a marriage....once, and only after, the civil legal requirements are met. Go for just the sectarian stuff and you are NOT married under the law. Even half a world away from here.

Even then our divorce rate indicates that "marriage" is more personal than legal in reality....except for the lawyers. :-)

ricpic said...

So you only get a pass from totalitarian gay-ety if you're "creative?" So all non-creative workers don't make the cut? Well, of course, all those proles, the waitresses and bartenders who maybe don't want to be servers at a gay "marriage" ceremony...they're just proles, they damn well WILL BE FORCED to participate in the abomination.

Methadras said...

So where is the outrage when a muslim bakery in Dearborn denies the gay cake?

http://twitchy.com/2015/04/03/hidden-camera-steven-crowder-tries-to-buy-a-gay-wedding-cake-at-muslim-bakeries-video/

Aridog said...

Methadras...in Dearborn we do as we like :-)

He was careful to pick his spots, however, as some would take his money and then give him a crappy lopsided cake with goats copulating on it or something.

NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...

He was careful to pick his spots, however, as some would take his money and then give him a crappy lopsided cake with goats copulating on it or something.

I would suspect in the majority of these cases that's what happens. They pick on a business that's owned by an outspoken Christian that they know is going to turn them down with a religion based reason.

That's basically what happened with the pizza restaurant owners in Indiana, they got asked a hypothetical question and the answered honestly.

Aridog said...

North of the 101 ... you are correct, and in Dearborn's case they picked Muslim owners who are forthright and by-passed the more entrepreneurial who would have said yes and delivered a botch. My neighbors are nothing if not entrepreneurial with a sly sense of humor.

BTW...he picked Dearborn because he thought all of us are Muslim, which we are not...in fact it is still a majority Christian city with a ratio of churches to mosques of about 5:1. He probably didn't notice the largest Gay/Lesbian club in the area, within our outer borders, but technically in Detroit....albeit surrounded by the Muslim community.

I "get" his point, but he either researched poorly or just chose to emphasize a particular point stand alone. Yep, he's right, no one is going to fault the Muslim bakers.

However, we are used to the pejorative intent now and then, ever since "Sharia Obsessed" (in error, not here and never has been)Sharon Angle ran for the Senate and assured Harry Reid's victory last time around. Add in the idiot "Rev" Terry Jones who visits here, 1000 miles from his home to say the same things...and the sundry phony evangelicals who bring us pigs' heads on sticks for entertainment.

Aridog said...

I should add that the phony evangelicals have succeeded in stopping the annual "Arab Festival" here (by incitement & litigation), which covered all Arabs here, both Muslim and Christian....it was an Arab festival...not a religious one...I know because it used to be held a block & 1/2 from my house and I attended annually. I am rather Catholic for those who think I have an unreasonable bias.