• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Ranchers.net

Here is another very concerning article involving homosexual marriage and churchs/ministers- and the problems of some of these non-discrimination statutes a lot of towns/cities are passing... But more clearly shows the differences between Repubs, Dems, and Libertarian views on the subject... Hopefully the Idaho courts will follow the Libertarian view on respecting individual rights and private property rights...

Gov’t Demands Ministers Marry Homosexuals Or Be Jailed

Posted by Austin Petersen • 19 Oct 2014


The government of Idaho is demanding ordained ministers celebrate same-sex weddings or face fines and jail time. Freedom of religion and private property in the United States is under attack from those whose agenda is to instill tolerance through the tactics of authoritarianism.


The Idaho case involves Donald and Evelyn Knapp, both ordained ministers, who run Hitching Post Wedding Chapel. Officials from Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, told the couple that because the city has a non-discrimination statute that includes sexual orientation and gender identity, and because the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down Idaho’s constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman, the couple would have to officiate at same-sex weddings in their own chapel.

The non-discrimination statute applies to all “public accommodations,” and the city views the chapel as a public accommodation.

On Friday, a same-sex couple asked to be married by the Knapps, and the Knapps politely declined. The Knapps now face a 180-day jail term and $1,000 fine for each day they decline to celebrate the same-sex wedding.

A week of honoring their faith and declining to perform the ceremony could cost the couple three and a half years in jail and $7,000 in fines.

Opining here: This is a very concerning case, from a libertarian point of view centered on private property and individual liberty. Homosexual couples should be free to marry as they wish and to use any institution such as a church or civic center, to do so. However, any voluntary institution (non-governmental) should have the right to approve or deny the ceremony happening on their private property. The government should NOT have any right to discriminate against homosexual couples in any way.

Now, the government is stepping in and saying that private individuals must take part in a ritual to which they are morally opposed. That is a total violation of religious liberty and supersedes the gay couple’s desire to force a minister to marry them. And it is certainly a crime for the government to threaten fines or jail time for moral objection. The US Army even has a special out for conscientious objectors. So why is the government of Idaho trying to force others to go against their religious beliefs.

It is inherently rooted in a lack of respect for private property.

Social democrats have always praised the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and they specifically praise Title II of this legislation, which is at its heart deals with the issue of private property. It reads: Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination because of race, color, religion, or national origin in certain places of public accommodation, such as hotels, restaurants, and places of entertainment. The Department of Justice can bring a lawsuit under Title II when there is reason to believe that a person has engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination in violation of Title II. The Department can obtain injunctive, but not monetary, relief in such cases. Individuals can also file suit to enforce their rights under Title II and other federal and state statutes may also provide remedies for discrimination in places of public accommodation.

What this means is that the government may intrude onto private property and demand that a service or product be sold. It was meant to make sure that blacks would be able to eat at lunch counters or stay at hotels, but the fundamental philosophy is one of obligations of citizens to provide for one another and not discriminate. The modern-day version of this will be to demand ministers and businesses that serve wedding cakes serve customers regardless of their sexual preferences. If you believe that government should demand that private property owners be required to serve something they disagree with (even if for bigoted reasons), you are an authoritarian. If you believe that free citizens should be able to conscientiously object, you are libertarian.

As someone who supports the idea of gay marriage, and full equality, it’s frustrating to be associated with the gay rights movement when this is the result. What’s even more frustrating is that, since Democrats have a higher moral ground for gays, their gay lobby is one of social democracy, wealth redistribution, and lack of respect for private property.

The worst part of this all is that the Republican Party has been keeping their gay lobby at arm’s length for so many years that they’ve been rendered ineffective at advancing pro-freedom solutions. If the Republicans had incorporated the GOP’s homosexual caucuses into their ranks, maybe there would be better legislation and local governance in regards to gay rights. As for now, Social Democrats are winning the day, and no free market solutions to gay marriage that respect private property are likely to come about.

Libertarians believe that government should be out of the marriage business entirely. A major part of the problem lies with social conservatives who think that the state should define marriage. These are the authoritarian conservatives, who don’t want less government control. They value tradition over liberty, and will demand that others adhere to their traditions as well. They want to use government as a hammer in the same way that social democrats are doing in Idaho right now against the ministers. Again, both conservatives and social democrats are the threat to liberty.

Shame on the Democrats for being so insufferably economically illiterate, and shame on the Republicans for being so insufferably intolerant for other people’s sexual preferences. Shame on them both for their advancement of petty tyranny. They are the authoritarians.

Read more at TLR: Gov't Demands Ministers Marry Homosexuals Or Be Jailed | The Libertarian Republic http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/govt-demands-ministers-marry-homosexuals-jailed/#ixzz3GhX5HOGv
Follow us: @TheLibRepublic on Twitter | LibertarianRepublic on Facebook


Boy do I agree with this guy... A good article explaining the differences between Republicans, Democrats and Libertarians... Both the radical left and the radical right are a threat to liberty...

Opining here: This is a very concerning case, from a libertarian point of view centered on private property and individual liberty. Homosexual couples should be free to marry as they wish and to use any institution such as a church or civic center, to do so. However, any voluntary institution (non-governmental) should have the right to approve or deny the ceremony happening on their private property. The government should NOT have any right to discriminate against homosexual couples in any way.

Now, the government is stepping in and saying that private individuals must take part in a ritual to which they are morally opposed. That is a total violation of religious liberty and supersedes the gay couple’s desire to force a minister to marry them. And it is certainly a crime for the government to threaten fines or jail time for moral objection. The US Army even has a special out for conscientious objectors. So why is the government of Idaho trying to force others to go against their religious beliefs.

It is inherently rooted in a lack of respect for private property.
------------------------------------------

Libertarians believe that government should be out of the marriage business entirely. A major part of the problem lies with social conservatives who think that the state should define marriage. These are the authoritarian conservatives, who don’t want less government control. They value tradition over liberty, and will demand that others adhere to their traditions as well. They want to use government as a hammer in the same way that social democrats are doing in Idaho right now against the ministers. Again, both conservatives and social democrats are the threat to liberty.

Shame on the Democrats for being so insufferably economically illiterate, and shame on the Republicans for being so insufferably intolerant for other people’s sexual preferences. Shame on them both for their advancement of petty tyranny. They are the authoritarians.
Top