There is one sure-fire way to stop any particular dumb idea being pushed by liberals. Whatever the topic, it is almost guaranteed.
Simply turn it around and apply any liberal proposal or regulation to liberals. You will watch any dumb idea disappear or crazy law be repealed so fast you won’t know what happened. That’s what happened to the Independent Counsel law. As soon as Republicans started using it against Democrats, specifically Bill Clinton, abruptly Democrats fell out of love with the law and let it lapse when it was up for renewal.
Liberals live in a world of double standards. So if you force them to live by their latest hair-brain scheme, they will drop it like a hot potato. Liberals won’t ever admit they were wrong. But they will forget all about it.
Now, liberals want to force conservative and Christian bakers to make wedding cakes for gay weddings, photographers to cover the wedding, florists to decorate it, etc. And now at last – if anyone didn’t already figure it out – the real purpose of the push for homosexual weddings is unmasked. The gay marriage issue is only about left-wing fascism.
Yet the solution is surprisingly easy. All across the nation, we need conservative activists with a little funds to launch the following campaign:
(1) Search for left-leaning or homosexual-wedding-friendly bakeries, florists, photographers, etc.
(2) Approach those bakers to bake cakes with conservative or Christian messages or photographers to photograph right-wing political conferences, conventions, or events.
For example, order a sheet cake for church or an event (maybe a party) with Christian messages or scriptures such as “Children need a mother and a father” or “Marriage is one man and one woman.” Or: John 3:3 “You must be born again” or “Jesus is Lord.”
Or order a sheet cake with conservative messages or candidates, like “Ted Cruz / Sarah Palin 2016.” Or “The Second Amendment: It’s the Law.” Or “Global Warming Hoax R.I.P.” Or “Happy Birthday Tea Party.”
(3) When a baker refuses to do the job or photographer refuses to cover a conservative or Christian event (or intentionally screws it up), file exactly the same type of lawsuit as homosexual activists. And of course tell the press, mostly the conservative media and talk radio.
The root problem here is a “public accommodation.” Back in the era of Jim Crow laws and the civil rights movement trying to end discrimination, there was a serious problem. Blacks traveling might enter a town and find that no one would rent them a motel room. They might have nowhere to stay at all. Blacks might not be able to find any restaurant where they could eat.
So the idea of a “public accommodation” – essential service – became important. How do you balance the right of a private business to do whatever he or she wants with their property (their business) and the rights of individuals? The only justification for telling a business whom they have to serve is when people have nowhere to go at all for essential services under discrimination.
That is what a “public accommodation” means – a hotel, a bus line, a taxicab, a restaurant. Civil rights laws guarantee essential services that are so fundamental that a person cannot reasonably survive and live if minorities are denied service.
But the vast majority of businesses are not “public accommodations.” If one photographer doesn’t feel like working with you, there are plenty of others. If one gift shop won’t sell you a snow globe, you’ll live.
Yet we need to understand: The campaign for homosexual marriage isn’t about homosexuals at all. Be careful with terminology: Most “homosexual activists” are not homosexual. This is a scheme to tear down traditional American society.
Back in the 1970s and 1980s, my family had two friends who were very openly and obviously a loving, committed, homosexual couple, John Bartis and Arthur Partington. (I name them because both have passed on, they never made it a secret, and being specific may be more believable.) However, they never made an issue of it. Neither did anyone else. They had their own life and enjoyed it. No one bothered them and they didn’t bother anyone.
In their own Italian ice cream shop, they would want the right to refuse service to someone they didn’t like. I am certain that Bartis and Partington would feel exploited by the straight activists causing chaos in their name.
We called them “Bartis and Partington” as if the two men were one unit. They helped two family members get started in careers. When my father helped a widow create a development on Sanibel Island, Dad sold the lot next door to Bartis and Partingon. Sometimes (when we weren’t visiting other family), we would go to their house for Thanksgiving or they would join us. They opened a gelato shop “Pinnochio’s” and we ate there all the time.
But the freedom of homosexuals to live their lives in peace is not what the current controversy is about. It is not enough that homosexuals have every opportunity, equality, right, and freedom that anyone else has.
Who are they fooling? What couple in love would hire a photographer who is not supportive of their blessed event? Come on. Do they really think we are that dumb? We are told that homosexual marriage is about two people who are in love? Really…?
So on the day when they want to celebrate their love, the happy couple wants to go out and hire a baker who hates what they are doing or a florist who disapproves of homosexuality. Really…? This is about love?
Would you want a photographer in your wedding who was hostile, such as if the couple was of different religions or remarrying after divorce? My Catholic grandmother boycotted her son’s wedding because my mother was Presbyterian. (Later, they became very close and Mom cared for dying Grandma Moseley on her death bed and “closed her eyes” in our home.) Last year, a pastor canceled from presiding over a friend’s wedding after learning that her fiancé was staying in her basement (but chaste).
If I were planning my wedding, preferring a distinctly Christian, spiritual flavor, I would want a photographer, a florist, a baker, musicians etc., who “gets” the spirit and atmosphere we are trying to create. Why in the clear blue sky would I want to hire someone who disapproves of my marriage?
Why would anyone want a wedding cake that kitchen staff might spit in? If you force people to do something they don’t want to do, what can you expect? I raise this point not to condone what would be outrageously illegal for a food supplier, but to emphasize how preposterous this entire issue is. Why would anyone want their “loving” wedding to spark hostility?
This is all about forcing society to change. “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” Millions who are not homosexual themselves are just using gays to destroy traditional America.
Jonathon Moseley is a Virginia business and criminal defense attorney. Moseley is also a co-host with the ?Conservative Commandos? radio show, and an active member of the Northern Virginia Tea Party. He studied Physics at Hampshire College, Finance at the University of Florida and law at George Mason University in Virginia. Moseley promoted Reagan?s policies at High Frontier and the Center for Peace in Freedom. He worked at the U.S. Department of Education, including at the Center for Choice in Education.
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2017 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2017 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement