Ministers threatened with arrest

[New Chalcedon]

Source:

1. http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=8184357
2. http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/city-threatens-to-arrest-ministers-who-refuse-to-perform-same-sex-weddings.html

Two Christian ministers who own an Idaho wedding chapel were told they had to either perform same-sex weddings or face jail time and up to $1,000 in daily fines, according to a lawsuit filed Friday in federal court.

Alliance Defending Freedom is representing Donald and Evelyn Knapp, two ordained ministers who own the Hitching Post Wedding Chapel in Coeur d’Alene.

“Right now they are at risk of being prosecuted,” attorney Jeremy Tedesco told me. “The threat of enforcement is more than just credible.”

The wedding chapel is registered as a “religious corporation” limited to performing “one-man-one-woman marriages as defined by the Holy Bible.”

What say you?

Okay, having found a source that's just a teensie bit more reliable than Faux News (no great feat, mind you!), here's what I have to say:

(1) This isn't a Federal, nor even a State, ordinance. It's a too-broadly written local ordinance.
(2) The defendants - the two ministers - will win under the same precedent set by Hobby Lobby. Unlike Hobby Lobby itself, I'd agree that they're right to do so - this ordinance (particularly this application of it) crosses any reasonable compromise between individual right to marry and religious freedom.
(3) Do note: No gays were involved in this. The local government has sued the ministers for breaching the ordinance, but no potential customers (aka the "gay mafia") have done so.
(4) Speaking of teh gheyz, I don't notice any of us doing anything to these people but rolling our eyes (faaaabulously, don't you know?) and shrugging. Your friend's strawmanning and ranting about "gay mafia" aside, you'd be hard-pressed to find a gay person who'd want to be married by someone who didn't want to. We want our marriages to mean something for us, not to mean misery for others. Get over yourselves, homophobes - you're just not that central to our thinking.

Oh, and:

(5) Tell "rides a dark horse" to take some Valium and calm the fuck down about "gay mafiosi" and so on.

[Sdaeriji]

In other words you want them to be public accommodations while not being public accommodations. No thanks. I'm done here. I can only listen to your vapid and asinine ideas for so long.

Under the new regime, a public accommodation would be a business that sells services or goods openly to the public, but retains the right to refuse service as it sees fit, where such service would be interpreted by the individual owner as being contrary to his economic interests or contrary to his personal or religious convictions.

Your "new regime" already exists in current law. Any business may operate as a private club, with restrictions on whom may be served based on their own internally defined membership criteria. The issue is, they have to openly operate in that fashion.

[New Chalcedon]

Under the new regime, a public accommodation would be a business that sells services or goods openly to the public, but retains the right to refuse service as it sees fit, where such service would be interpreted by the individual owner as being contrary to his economic interests or contrary to his personal or religious convictions.

Your "new regime" already exists in current law. Any business may operate as a private club, with restrictions on whom may be served based on their own internally defined membership criteria. The issue is, they have to openly operate in that fashion.

Precisely. An establishment advertising itself as "open to the public" is indeed open to the public, on the basis of ability to pay. Not to bits and pieces of the public, dependent upon their skin colour/religious beliefs/whatever.

[Indira]

Do you have someone RELIABLE to back this OP? Because all I'm seeing here in your OP is unsupported anti-gay marriage strawmen

[Dyakovo]

What would hqppen if it were a mosque that refused the wedding?

Nothing. Why?

[New Chalcedon]

Do you have someone RELIABLE to back this OP? Because all I'm seeing here in your OP is unsupported anti-gay marriage strawmen

The story appears to be mostly genuine; however, it actually has next to nothing to do with gay people wanting to get married there - none, so far as I can tell, have even threatened to sue them. It's the city that's suing them for violating the local ordinance, with the defined penalties attached.

Now, the ordinance is wrong-headed as fuck (I wouldn't want to be married by someone who thinks I oughtn't be, much less make them do it!), but it's hardly the product of the "gay mafia".

[Dyakovo]

Source:

1. http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=8184357
2. http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/city-threatens-to-arrest-ministers-who-refuse-to-perform-same-sex-weddings.html



What say you?

Okay, having found a source that's just a teensie bit more reliable than Faux News (no great feat, mind you!), here's what I have to say:

(1) This isn't a Federal, nor even a State, ordinance. It's a too-broadly written local ordinance.
(2) The defendants - the two ministers - will win under the same precedent set by Hobby Lobby. Unlike Hobby Lobby itself, I'd agree that they're right to do so - this ordinance (particularly this application of it) crosses any reasonable compromise between individual right to marry and religious freedom.
(3) Do note: No gays were involved in this. The local government has sued the ministers for breaching the ordinance, but no potential customers (aka the "gay mafia") have done so.
(4) Speaking of teh gheyz, I don't notice any of us doing anything to these people but rolling our eyes (faaaabulously, don't you know?) and shrugging. Your friend's strawmanning and ranting about "gay mafia" aside, you'd be hard-pressed to find a gay person who'd want to be married by someone who didn't want to. We want our marriages to mean something for us, not to mean misery for others. Get over yourselves, homophobes - you're just not that central to our thinking.

Oh, and:

(5) Tell "rides a dark horse" to take some Valium and calm the fuck down about "gay mafiosi" and so on.

I don't know, I just read though the law, and I'm not seeing any issue with it...

Chapter 9.56 DISCRIMINATION IN HOUSING, EMPLOYMENT AND PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS PROHIBITED

9.56.010: PURPOSE AND DECLARATION OF POLICY:
9.56.020: DEFINITIONS:
9.56.030: PROHIBITED DISCRIMINATORY ACTS:
9.56.040: EXCEPTIONS:
9.56.050: UNLAWFUL INTIMIDATION, RETALIATION, AND INTERFERENCE:
9.56.060: PENALTY:
9.56.070: PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION:

9.56.010: PURPOSE AND DECLARATION OF POLICY:


A. In order to ensure that all persons, regardless of sexual orientation and/or gender identity/expression enjoy the full benefits of citizenship and are afforded equal opportunities for employment, housing, commercial property, and the use of public accommodations, the city of Coeur d'Alene has determined that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity/expression must be addressed, and appropriate legislation enacted.

B. It is hereby declared that every individual in the city of Coeur d'Alene has the right to work and earn wages through gainful employment, has the right to seek housing, and has the right to enjoy public accommodation and hospitality.

C. It is hereby declared to be the public policy of the city of Coeur d'Alene to foster the employment of all individuals in accordance with their abilities. Every individual has the right to work and earn wages through gainful employment. Discriminatory employment practices are detrimental because they impede the social and economic progress of a city by preventing all of the city's citizens from contributing to the cultural, spiritual, social, and commercial life of the community. The contributions of all the citizens of the city of Coeur d'Alene are essential to the city's growth, vitality, and prosperity.

D. It is the intent of this chapter that all persons be treated fairly and equally, and it is the express intent of this chapter to guarantee fair and equal treatment under the law to all people in the city of Coeur d'Alene. The denial of fair and equal treatment under the law due to sexual orientation or gender identity/expression is detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the city's citizens, and damages a city's economic well being.

E. This chapter shall be deemed an exercise of the police power of the city of Coeur d'Alene for the protection of the public welfare, prosperity, health and peace of the city of Coeur d'Alene, its residents and the community.

F. The prohibitions against discriminatory acts as provided for in this chapter are intended to supplement state and federal civil rights law prohibiting discrimination in the areas of employment, public accommodations, and housing. For complaints alleging discrimination on a basis proscribed under state or federal law (e.g., race, color, religious creed, ancestry, age, sex, national origin, and/or disability) the complainant is advised of his or her right to file a report alleging a violation of Idaho Code section 18-7301 et seq., and/or his or her right to file a complaint with the Idaho commission on human rights and/or the federal equal employment opportunity commission pursuant to title VII of the civil rights act of 1964 as amended, the fair housing act of 1968 as amended, or the Americans with disabilities act of 1990 as amended. (Ord. 3466, 2013)

9.56.020: DEFINITIONS:

DENY: Includes any act which, directly or indirectly, by any person or his agent or employee, results or is intended or calculated to result in whole or in part in any discrimination, distinction, restriction, or unequal treatment or representation. It also includes, but is not limited to, the requiring of a person to pay a larger sum than the uniform rates charged other persons, or the refusing or withholding from persons the admission, patronage, custom, presence, frequenting, dwelling, staying, or lodging in any place of public resort, accommodation, assemblage, or amusement except for conditions and limitations established by law and applicable alike to all persons, regardless of sexual orientation and/or gender identity/expression.

DISCRIMINATION: Any direct or indirect exclusion, distinction, segregation, limitation, refusal, denial, or other differentiation in the treatment of a person because of a person's actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity/expression or because of a person's association with any such person. Discrimination shall not be interpreted to require or to grant or accord any preferential treatment to any person because of that person's sexual orientation or gender identity/expression.

FULL ENJOYMENT OF: Shall be construed to include, but not be limited to, the right to use, rent or purchase real property, any service, commodity or article of personal property offered or sold by any person or establishment to the public, and the admission of any person to accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges of any place of public resort, accommodation, assemblage or amusement, without acts directly or indirectly causing persons of any particular sexual orientation and/or gender identity/expression to be treated as not welcome, accepted, desired or solicited.

GENDER IDENTITY/EXPRESSION: A gender related identity, appearance, expression or behavior of an individual regardless of a person's assigned sex at birth.

HOUSING ACCOMMODATION: A building or portion of a building, whether constructed or to be constructed, that is or will be used as the home, domicile, residence, or sleeping quarters of its occupants.

PERSON: Any natural person, firm, corporation, partnership or other organization, association or group of persons however arranged.

PLACE OF PUBLIC RESORT, ACCOMMODATION, ASSEMBLAGE OR AMUSEMENT: Includes, but is not limited to, any public place, licensed or unlicensed, kept for gain, hire or reward, or where charges are made for admission, service, occupancy or use of any property or facilities, whether conducted for the entertainment, housing or lodging of transient guests, or for the benefit, use or accommodation of those seeking health, recreation or rest, or for the sale of goods and merchandise, or for the rendering of personal services, or for public conveyance or transportation on land, water or in the air, including the stations and terminals thereof and the garaging of vehicles, or where food or beverages of any kind are sold for consumption on the premises, or where public amusement, entertainment, sports or recreation of any kind is offered with or without charge, or where medical service or care is made available, or where the public gathers, congregates, or assembles for amusement, recreation or public purposes, or public halls, public elevators and public washrooms of buildings and structures occupied by two (2) or more tenants, or by the owner and one or more tenants, or any public library or any educational institution wholly or partially supported by public funds, or schools of special instruction, or nursery schools, or daycare centers or children's camps; nothing herein contained shall be construed to include, or apply to, any institute, bona fide club, or place of accommodation, which is by its nature distinctly private, provided that where public use is permitted that use shall be covered by this section; nor shall anything herein contained apply to any educational facility operated or maintained by a bona fide religious or sectarian institution.

SEXUAL ORIENTATION: Actual or perceived homosexuality, heterosexuality and/or bisexuality. (Ord. 3466, 2013)

9.56.030: PROHIBITED DISCRIMINATORY ACTS:

The following acts are prohibited and shall constitute a misdemeanor:

A. To deny to any other person because of sexual orientation and/or gender identity/expression the right to work: 1) by failing or refusing to hire, 2) by discharging, 3) by barring from employment, 4) by discriminating against such person in compensation or in other terms or conditions of employment, or 5) otherwise discriminating against an individual with respect to employment.

B. To deny to or to discriminate against any person because of sexual orientation and/or gender identity/expression the full enjoyment of any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges of any place of public resort, accommodation, assemblage, or amusement.

C. To deny to or discriminate against any other person because of sexual orientation and/or gender identity/expression in the sale, purchase, lease or rental of any housing accommodation, or to otherwise discriminate in the terms and conditions, maintenance, improvement or repair of any housing accommodation. (Ord. 3466, 2013)

9.56.040: EXCEPTIONS:

A. Notwithstanding any other provision herein, nothing in this chapter is intended to alter or abridge other rights, protections, or privileges secured under state and/or federal law. This chapter shall be construed and applied in a manner consistent with first amendment jurisprudence regarding the freedom of speech and exercise of religion.

B. This chapter does not apply to:
1. Religious corporations, associations, educational institutions, or societies.
2. An expressive association whose employment of a person protected by this chapter would significantly burden the association's rights of expressive association under Boy Scouts Of America v. Dale, 530 U.S. 640 (2000).
3. The United States government, any of its departments or agencies, or any corporation wholly owned by it; or the state of Idaho or any of its departments, agencies, or political subdivisions, other than the city of Coeur d'Alene.

C. This chapter shall not apply: 1) to the rental of a housing accommodation in a building which contains housing accommodations for not more than two (2) families living independently of each other, if the lessor or a member of his family resides in one of the housing accommodations, or 2) to the rental of a room or rooms in a single-family residential housing accommodation by an individual if he or a member of his family resides therein. (Ord. 3466, 2013)

9.56.050: UNLAWFUL INTIMIDATION, RETALIATION, AND INTERFERENCE:

It shall be unlawful for any person to discriminate against, harass, threaten, harm, damage, or otherwise penalize another person for opposing an unlawful practice, for filing a complaint, for assisting, or participating in any manner in the investigation, or in mediation concerning this chapter. (Ord. 3466, 2013)

9.56.060: PENALTY:

A. A violation of this chapter is a misdemeanor, punishable as provided in title 1, chapter 1.28 of this code.

B. A prosecutor may reduce the violation to an infraction, payable by a one hundred dollar ($100.00) fine, if the defendant engages in corrective actions, which may include, but are not limited to, the following: sensitivity training for the defendant and/or the defendant's employees; the defendant's agreement to adopt and pursue a policy of nondiscrimination in its practices; and the defendant's agreement to not engage in discriminatory practices in the future. The charge shall be filed as a misdemeanor violation and may only be reduced upon motion of the prosecutor. There shall be no right to a trial by jury for an infraction citation or complaint.

C. Any person who falsely reports a violation of this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor. (Ord. 3466, 2013)

9.56.070: PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION :

There is no private right of action that is created by this chapter or money damages available to any person based on this chapter. (Ord. 3466, 2013)

Linky

[England-Ireland]

They should be sent to jail, and taught tolerance and the concept of the equality of all humans.

marriage is supposed to be one man and one woman not two men or two women I am aginst Sam sex marriage

[Indira]

They should be sent to jail, and taught tolerance and the concept of the equality of all humans.

marriage is supposed to be one man and one woman not two men or two women I am aginst Sam sex marriage

Why? There is no logical reason for such a position.

[Peluzzanien]

nope,it isnt,England-Ireland

[Dyakovo]

They should be sent to jail, and taught tolerance and the concept of the equality of all humans.

marriage is supposed to be one man and one woman not two men or two women¹ I am aginst Sam sex marriage²

1: According to who/what?
2: What is "Sam sex marriage"?

[Myrensis]

The fact that they are a for-profit entity makes me tilt ever so lightly against giving them a pass.

BUT

It doesn't really matter at all because the Hobby Lobby decision wraps this one up.

I look forward to the inevitable growing numbers of cases of people using Hobby Lobby to declare that their religious beliefs exempt them from this law, and that one, and the other one over there.

And the looks on the Conservative Justice's faces, and the religious folks who were so excited about Hobby Lobby, when the SCOTUS starts having to declare, "No, your religious beliefs are stupid and invalid so you don't get exemptions.", "Yes, your religious beliefs are good and justified, so you do."

[Peluzzanien]

what do you have against homosexuals

[Indira]

marriage is supposed to be one man and one woman not two men or two women I am aginst Sam sex marriage

Why? There is no logical reason for such a position.

Actually another question. What do you have against people called Sam?

[England-Ireland]

marriage is supposed to be one man and one woman not two men or two women¹ I am aginst Sam sex marriage²

1: According to who/what?
2: What is "Sam sex marriage"?

I meant same

[Peluzzanien]

u dont say

[England-Ireland]

An Important Disclaimer About Ads: Due to the sensitive nature of this article, some highly inappropriate and offensive advertisements may appear on this page. I apologize and assure you, as host to the Christianity site, that all ads on About.com (an advertiser-supported network) are beyond my control. While occasionally unsuitable, the ads do make it possible for the site to exist with the continued goal of offering free practical and spiritual resources for living the Christian faith. I do not endorse or sponsor any of the advertisers, their products or site content.
Ads
Growing in Christ
www.navpress.com
This 13 week Bible study will help you in your daily walk with God.
Free iPhone Study Bible
www.wavestudybible.com
You've never seen a Bible like this before.
3 Herbs that Beat Anxiety
www.a2xanxiety.com
Doctors Reveal 1 Weird Compound to Calm Anxiety that May Surprise You
Free Bible Study Lessons
Christianity
Daily Bible
Bible on Marriage
Bible Resources
Homosexuality is the act of intercourse between people of the same sex. When the Bible speaks of homosexuality, its emphasis is on behavior, not condition. God loves sinners, but condemns sin. And the Bible's verdict on homosexual behavior, as with all sexual immorality, is that it is sinful. This extensive collection of Scriptures is provided as an aid for those who wish to study what the Bible says about homosexuality.

[England-Ireland]

http://christianity.about.com/od/Bible- ... uality.htm

[The 502nd SS]

marriage is supposed to be one man and one woman not two men or two women I am aginst Sam sex marriage

Why? There is no logical reason for such a position.

man+man=nothing
man+woman= future generation
woman+woman= nothing

because only married couples can have sex and not condemn their souls to eternal damnation

[Peluzzanien]

theres nothing wrong with being homosexual.Regardless of what some fantasy book says.

[The 502nd SS]

theres nothing wrong with being homosexual.Regardless of what some fantasy book says.

because two people of the same sex can definitely have biological child by themselves

[England-Ireland]

im a conservative I am traditional I belive marriage is between one man one woman and homo sexuality violates this and the government doesn't have the right to arrest people because the refuse to allow a same sex marriage and the governments is violating the constitution

[England-Ireland]

Why? There is no logical reason for such a position.

man+man=nothing
man+woman= future generation
woman+woman= nothing

because only married couples can have sex and not condemn their souls to eternal damnation

i agree

[Peluzzanien]

who cares.I dont want children later either.

[Peluzzanien]

Kids are annoying.