Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'sacreligious'.
American society has concluded that bigotry and discrimination cannot happen in the public square. Further, it is quickly reaching the place where gender orientation is protected the same as race. One possible conclusion the courts may make (I'm not agree or disagree--just predicting): 1. A business (not a church or other house of worship, but church-run ones would be included) cannot be allowed to refuse product or service to customers on the basis of protected categories. So, certainly no denying business because, "I don't serve Pagans, LBGT, or races I don't agree with/like." 2. On the issue of LBGT weddings it may end up depending on the venue and the officiant. If the wedding is secular (Justice of the Peace offciates), then a religiously-oriented vendor might be required to provide services/products. If the wedding is religious, but is not of the same religion as the vendor, then the vendor may be required to provide services/products. HOWEVER, if the wedding is religious, and is of the same religion as the vendor, then the vendor may be able to claim RFRA protection. Why? Let me provide an example. I bake cakes, and I belong to an A/G (or LDS) church. An LBGT couple comes to my shop and says they are having a wedding over at the Methodist Church, and could I bake a cake for them. I say I will not, because, as a Christian, I believe the Bible prohibits same-sex marriages. Since this wedding is happening in a Christian church, I find the ceremony to be profane and sacrilegious. Kill me or jail me, but I will not be a part of it! I could see a judge siding with the defendant. His/her religious belief and practice would be substantially burdened forced participation. The government does not have a compelling interest in forcing that. There are other sources for cakes. Even if the wedding party had to ship one in, that would be less of a burden than requiring a religious person to engage in what s/he views as a corruption of a sacrament. THOUGHTS?