0 votes

Freedom of association in Colorado about to be banned

I strongly believe in the principle "live and let live"-- It seems , however the more radical members of the Lesbian/Gay community do not. In Massachusetts, they have already made it difficult for faith-based organizations who handle adoptions-they either have to abandon their principles & beliefs concerning homosexuality or go out of business. Now the same issues are coming up in Colorado , and the attitude of the ACLU is : Keep your faith out of your buisnesss. As a freedom loving Christians, should we not have the right to set our own standards for our businesses (as long as we don't discriminate on the basis of unchangable attributes- such as race, nationality, handicaps)? news link www.citizenlink.org click on 5/27/08 news Colorado legislation normalizes all types of sexual orientation.




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Live and Let Live goes both ways (so to speak)

Well, a note about your final thought, but I'll address that last.

This should really be the case for all businesses:

- Private adoption agencies should absolutely be free to serve the clientele they wish to serve. Those wishing the services of a secular adoption agency can go there; those wishing the services of a faith-based adoption agency can go through those organizations.

- Restaurants and bars can choose whether or not to allow smoking in their establishment. People will be able to patronize whatever type of establishment best serves their needs. Those who are more successful in their chosen mode will flourish; those who lose customers (either because they do allow smoking or they don't) will fail. The market will decide their success.

- As to the whole marriage issue? Well, here's where my popularity takes a dive in Christian circles (not that I have great popularity!) -- I'm a Christian, and I personally believe that God intended one man / one woman for marriage. I do think that is the ideal.

And: I think there should be NO government intervention on marriage whatsoever.

Gay marriages? Have at it.
FLDS or other polygamous arrangements? That's your business.
Straight one-man-one-woman traditional marriage? How very nice, but that, too, is none of the government's business.

Marriages are contracts between two (er, maybe more, I guess!) people. And the government's role in that agreement is completely erroneous. It is an interest solely in taxation and control. Which has nothing whatsoever to do with the personal pledges people make with one another.

One thing about your post, though, and that's this: there are many who believe that sexual orientation is not a choice but an "unchangable attribute" (I honestly am not certain myself whether homosexuality is a choice or a trait; my personal jury is still out on that one, and I'm not interested in debating the issue here). So, to deny services to gays may well be argued as a discriminatory act.

However, a faith-based adoption agency most certainly could open their services to the gay community, with the caveat that it is that agency's policy to place children only in homes with a mother and father. And if that policy was not to a client's liking, they could seek out another agency that would better serve their needs (just like the other examples mentioned above).

Just like if I go to a steak house and demand sushi, the proprietor can justly tell me it's not their policy to serve raw fish, and if I want sushi, perhaps I should go to a sushi restaurant.

Wait...I like sushi...a lot...maybe I can get the ACLU to force ALL restaurants to serve sushi...bonzai!!!

Thank you...

I was trying to make this point the other day. I lost my job due to a business having to close down (pool hall) because they made it against the law to smoke there. All the customers started going to a place outside the city limits so they could smoke.

If someone owns a business, they should be able to run it as they please.

If someone wants to get married, they should be able to marry who they please.

Either way, the government, and should keep their noses out of our business and their hands out of our wallets.

FREEDOM.

Just like if I want to post on here somewhere that 9/11 was an inside job committed by alien Jews from outter space working for their lizard queen, Hillary Clinton...

I can.

FREEDOM.

Title=belly laugh

And the rest is a very clean argument about FOA, but: Why can't those who discriminate against 'unchangable attributes' be allowed to fail as well?

And you are SPOT ON when you say that marriage is a contract between 2 or more people, not a couple and the government. Marriage is a business, and requires a contract.

Could you imagine if the same standards considered by some for marriage were debated as what should also be applied for incorporation? Sorry, but looks like the work of throwbacks (very similar to the middle-east) to the stone-age.

THE MORE I LEARN ABOUT GOVERNMENT
THE MORE I LOVE MY GUNS
FourWindsTradingPost

THE MORE I LEARN ABOUT GOVERNMENT
THE MORE I LOVE MY GUNS
FourWindsTradingPost

I agree, this is how it should be delt with..

The problem is that there are hot-heads on both sides of the issue, so they (the hot-heads) think that it has to be either full acceptance of our ideals by everyone or you are not 'tolerant'.

Libera me, let the truth break, what my fears make--Leslie Phillips

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

We must fight this.

But as you know, the more they persecute, the closer it gets to His eventual return.
http://www.escapeallthesethings.com/

______________________
*** God bless Ron Paul ***
* Ron Paul For President *

______________________
*** God bless Ron Paul ***
* Ron Paul For President *

I agree

And that is a good thing. :O)

You are going to have some problems

Unfortunately you have pushy gay activists who want to run you out of town because you're not totally comfortable with the gayness.

It seems like another form of discrimination. I would recommend giving gay couples a chance in order to survive in that climate. You will have every opportunity to weed out the yo yos and idiots and find the right-hearted people.