Oh, Bryan. It’s been way too long since I’d engaged in faux dialog with you on one of your zany screeds. What’ve you got for me today?
The rush is on for Congress to pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which will, bizarrely, actually enshrine discrimination against values-driven businessmen everywhere in the United States.
Really, Bryan? We have “value-driven businessmen” in this country? Ayn Rand would be shocked!
In fact, if ENDA is signed into law, it will run the First Amendment through the shredder, leaving only confetti behind.
I have seriously considered multiple times Googling the phrase “will mean the end of religious freedom in the United States” Because I strongly suspect we’ve heard that about eleventy-dozen things over the last decade, let along the last thirty years.
ENDA would make it a federal crime to take sexual deviancy into account in personnel decisions of any kind.
Good Lord! You mean blacks who marry whites could get a job in town!? Damn commies!
Any and every employer who decided not to hire a crossdressing transvestite, for instance, would face a business-ending lawsuit whether the business is a Christian bookstore, a trucking company, or a daycare center.
What do you have against small businesses, Bryan?
So … what does gender identity have to do with driving trucks, Bryan?
I mean, what is it you’re arguing, really? That anyone should be able to say, “I find that [whatever that should happen to be] morally reprehensible, so I should be able to not hire them, or be able to fire them as soon as I find out about it”?
I mean, clearly, you’re all about making gays and transgendered people unemployable (to be followed, no doubt, about how such individuals are shiftless, jobless, parasites on society, just what you’d expect from deviants), but what other groups are in your sights? How about those mixed-race couples? I would never accuse you of being a religion-driven racist, Bryan, but we can both probably agree that they exist. Should they, “driven” by their “values,” be able to fire uppity blacks who marry whites because the Lord said the races should be kept separate? What about someone who thinks of Jews as Christ-killers — should he be able to fire any “hidden” Jew he discovers is employed by him? How about a woman who’s had an abortion — is she fair game to be kicked out of the Christian bookstore, or the daycare center, or the trucking company?
Where, precisely, does it stop?
For that matter, should a Muslim businessman be able to discriminate against Christians? Yes, yes, I know, Bryan, Muslims should be forced to renounce their religion if they come here, and be persuaded to convert abroad, because they are enemies of the United States, yada yada yada. We’ve heard you preach that before. But, believe it or not, the law doesn’t operate on “I think this is the way things are, so the law has to back me up, regardless of what you think the way things are.” There are, believe it or not, rules involved. And discrimination for the goose is discrimination for the gander.
ENDA would grant special legal protections in the workplace to those who are active practitioners of the infamous crime against nature.
Yes, marrying outside of racial bounds would be protected — oh, wait, I keep forgetting, that’s not the “crime against nature” you’re arguing should be open for discrimination against.
Not only would employers not be allowed to take such conduct into account, their businesses, livelihoods and careers would be in in jeopardy if they did.
Yes, believe it or not, if you do something against the law, there may be consequences. Incredible!
It is not only likely but a matter of virtual certainty that transvestites will begin applying for jobs at values-driven businesses just so they can get turned down and then immediately file the mother of all discrimination suits against businesses such as Hobby Lobby and Chick-fil-A.
As has happened on a nearly daily basis here in Colorado, where state law prevents discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. It’s been a horrible disaster, clogging the courts, leading to every Christian values-based company going out of business and … oh, wait, no it hasn’t.
In Colorado, 35 out of a total 516 job discrimination claims filed statewide involved sexual orientation, while just one involved gender identity discrimination in fiscal year 2011-2012. In fiscal 2007-2008, when sexual orientation and transgender became a protected status in Colorado, there were 21 sexual orientation and two gender identity claims filed with state agencies.
Help! My religious freedom is being repressed!
And I assure you, Bryan, we have no shortage of Hobby Lobby and Chick-fil-A stores. All of them still in business.
If you don’t think that’s a virtual certainty, you are clueless regarding the meanness, vindictiveness and cruelty of homosexual activists.
And when you talk about meanness, vindictiveness, and cruelty, Bryan, we can be assured you know whereof you speak. Regardless of what the record says.
Things are bad enough as it is, as photographers, florists and bakers have been fined, threatened with prosecution by government officials and driven out of business altogether by Big Gay. The last thing we need is to give these bullies a baseball bat they can take into any values-driven business and start trashing the place.
Lovely. Let me give you a clue, Bryan — when it comes to “baseball bats,” it’s not usually gay people on the dealing end.
A conservative business owner’s right to the free exercise of religion? Gone in a puff of hateful bigotry. His right to free speech? Gone. To even express his values when it comes to personnel decisions will put him on the rack. His right to freedom of the press? Gone. Even so much as writing a letter to the editor expressing his values will become a business-ending offense.
Just to touch bases here, Bryan, does a businessman who thinks women should be at home rather than competing against men in the marketplace, as God clearly dictates it — hasn’t that particular “religious freedom” already been disposed of in a “puff of hateful bigotry”? How about the hotel owner who doesn’t want blacks sleeping in his beds? Isn’t his free speech already gone? And, clearly, there aren’t any more people writing letters to the editor (or editorials) about how evil Jews or Muslims are, because as a protected class that would instantly end their business.
Big Gay is more powerful than all the other interest groups in the US … including the 3/4 of the population who call themselves “Christian”.
What’s that? Racists and bigots still seem to exist, be able to worship and speak out and write letters to the editor, but somehow Big Gay will be a more potent force than Big Woman or Big Jew or Big Negro? Inconceivable!
His right to freedom of association, to assemble a workforce that will reflect the values he wants his business to embody? Gone with the wind of intolerance.
Just as it was with his (note “his”) right to freedom of association in assembling a workforce of all men. Or all whites. Or all Protestants. Oh, oh those horrid winds of intolerance!
His right to petition the government for the redress of grievances? Gone. He will be presumed guilty for even holding to such antiquated and out-of-date ideals.
Please, please, Brian, tell me about someone who wrote a letter to their Congressman about this and got thrown in jail for it. Please.
What is even worse is that Congress is on the cusp of making it illegal to fire pedophiles. I am not kidding and I do not exaggerate. If we can’t take “sexual orientation” into account in hiring and firing, someone is going to have to tell us what a sexual orientation is so we will know whom to punish. That’s the job of the American Psychiatric Association (APA).
The AFA last week exposed the APA for classifying pedophilia as just another “orientation” (their word, not ours) in its diagnostic manual, the DSM, the Bible of the therapeutic profession. Caught with their hand in the deviancy cookie jar, the APA is quickly seeking to backpedal, saying it was all just an unfortunate mistake, don’t you know, and promising to make corrections in subsequent print editions.
But meanwhile, the classification of pedophilia as just another orientation against which we must not discriminate continues in the print version, sitting right there for Jerry Sandusky-loving lawyers to use as a cudgel when they think the time is right. Men who admit they are sexually attracted to children will soon be able to apply for jobs at your child’s daycare center or elementary school, and there won’t be anything that can be done to stop them without the risk of being dragged into court.
You may think I hyperbolize. But the “sexual orientation” defense has already been used in court as a defense against charges of pederasty, and even the Harvard Medical School is already making the case that pedophilia is just like homosexuality: people, they say, are born that way, there’s nothing they can do about it, and the rest of us just have to get over our Judeo-Christian aversions and endure the risk.
So, yeah, I get it, Bryan. Slippery slope. If you make it illegal to fire Catholics, next thing you know they’ll be making it illegal to fire Mormons. Then the Jews will be protected. And then someone will argue that Islam is really a “religion” and even they will be protected. Eek!
Pedophilia is, at present, illegal, and for reasons that go beyond “Wow, that’s not the way I swing.” And, frankly, I’ve read the HMS article you linked to. I don’t think it means what you thing it means; it does indicate that there are no particular treatments possible, but it neither condones nor indicates that society just needs to “get over” it. Anything but.
So, no, Congress is not about to legalize pedophilia or, therefore, make it a legal requirement that pedophiles be hired at all day care centers. Nice try, though.
You know, you certainly can’t trust those Catholics in your workplace …
Founding father Charles Carroll, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, said:
“Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time…
“They therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure and which insures to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments.”
Funny thing about Charles Carroll. He was a Catholic. Maryland law prior to the Revolution prevented him from entering politics, practicing law, or voting. Because, of course, Catholics were evil Papists, whose loyalty was to a foreign sovereign. People knew that, politically and religiously, and many of them felt that to invite Catholics into full participation in the American society was contrary to God’s will and would spell DOOM to our society.
Kind of like the gays.
Well, liberals are busy planting ENDA like an IED at the very base of our system of values. It’s time to disarm the device and the misguided souls in Congress who put it there. Just say a loud, unambiguous and unhesitating “No” to this misbegotten and freedom-destroying device before it blows up in your child’s face.
Why is it that the folks who so vehemently claim to follow Christ are the ones who most freely use violent imagery, either to describe their own struggle to characterize their opponents?
