Sally Kohn: Why Indiana Needs a Church of Gay (Vile and repulsive fascists)

The Daily Beast ^ | March 31, 2015 | Sally Kohn

[2ndDivisionVet]

Maybe it’s time progressives started using these “religious freedom” laws to our advantage.

Maybe it’s time to start the Church of Gay. Or actually pass state and federal laws specifying that gay businesses have the legal right to discriminate against religious fundamentalists. Time to fight special rights with special rights.

After all, Indiana’s new “Religious Freedom Restoration Act” does just that—it confers special rights on a small minority of citizens and, importantly, their private businesses, to disregard other laws and the constitution and discriminate against other citizens. The law isn’t about protecting religious freedom; it’s about hiding the impulse toward ugly and un-American discrimination beneath the distraction of more palatable rationalizations.

In response, yes, there should be court challenges and tourism boycotts and more. But I would also like to propose the “Gay Freedom Restoration Act.” And should such a law fail to pass in Indiana or other states, then I will be starting the Church of Gay. Allow me to explain.

First, you need to understand that, despite what some have insisted, the Indiana law differs from the federal “Religious Freedom Restoration Act” and similar state laws in two important ways. For one thing, the Indiana law explicitly allows private, for-profit businesses to use “the free exercise of religion” to justify discriminatory policies. And while under other statutes “free exercise” is a right of defense against government lawsuits, Indiana expands that to include private lawsuits as well. What that means is that a private for-profit business can claim religion as an excuse to discriminate and then use that claim as a defense against any lawsuit.

Plus the Indiana law’s intent is radically different and more nefarious than its predecessors. In fact, in Indiana’s legislative debates, Democrats “offered the Republican legislative majority a chance to amend the new act to say that it did not permit businesses to discriminate.” Republicans rejected the amendment.

Meanwhile, according to a poll from last year, 62 percent of mainline white Protestants, 58 percent of white Catholics and 56 percent of Hispanic Catholics support marriage equality. Apparently, 83 percent of Jews in America also support marriage equality. But if a Jewish private business owner wanted to discriminate against a gay couple, we should allow him to because of a very marginal interpretation of his religion?

Yes, that’s basically how it works. “As long as it’s a sincere belief that can be plausibly organized as a religion,” explains Professor Katherine Franke, director of Columbia Law School’s Center for Gender and Sexuality Law. “In fact it’s regardless of whether that religion’s official doctrine adheres to your beliefs. We don’t ask the courts to interpret the reasonableness. You don’t even have to belong to a congregation or attend services. It just has to be plausible.”

That’s a pretty damn low bar. And us gay people love bars. So…

Why not introduce that “Gay Freedom Restoration Act” to protect sexual freedom and liberty and support the “free exercise” thereof by privately owned businesses? Would that mean a gay-owned restaurant could refuse to serve food to a right-wing religious homophobe? Or maybe Apple Computers, run by openly-gay CEO Tim Cook, could refuse to sell iPhones and iPads to fundamentalists?

Wait a second, you say, that’s discrimination! That kind of law would be morally wrong and possibly illegal! Yes, but the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees “equal protection under the law” including, in this brave new world, the right to discriminate.

Even better would be a national “Church of Gay” to which gay and straight folks could belong. Heck, if Scientology can be a religion, why can’t we start one? A central tenet of the “Church of Gay” would be equality and acceptance of everyone, and therefore violations of those principles would undermine the “sincerely held belief” of the Gayists.

Then again, Professor Franke points out, we don’t need to start a new church. There are plenty of organized, mainstream religions that already commit themselves to equality. Last year a group of ministers sued the state of North Carolina for not allowing ministers in the state to perform same-sex marriages. The ministers, plus one rabbi, filed a lawsuit challenging the state’s anti-gay marriage laws for restricting their free exercise of religion.

Professor Franke says, “Now is the time to ask whether progressives can use these religious freedom laws, too.” For instance, she could imagine a private business owner in Indiana using the new “Religious Freedom Restoration Act” to challenge the state’s open carry permit law: A private business owner whose sincerely held religious beliefs include peace and non-violence could object to an individual being allowed to enter her store or restaurant with a weapon. Indiana also has proposed legislation to require public school teachers to carry weapons; but were such a mandate to pass, a teacher could file suit because such a requirement violated his religious freedom.

Under Indiana law, medical professionals must counsel women against terminating their pregnancies. But doctors and nurses could file suit arguing that these and other restrictions on abortion in the state not only violate their free speech but their freedom of religion, including their sincerely held beliefs about the sanctity of women and their freedom.

The simple fact is that gay rights and marriage equality are becoming the norm. It’s increasingly the law of the land, and it’s by a growing majority of Americans. But instead of continuing to fight it out in our democracy or courts, a slim minority of fringe fundamentalists have rebranded their bigotry as “religious freedom.”

This is a manipulation of both religion and our nation’s principles and values. While America has never been perfect, a consistent fact of our history has been that those who want to discriminate have always, eventually, lost in the face of those who want to expand justice and liberty.

Those who want to discriminate are now, again, losing. So might I suggest giving up, going home and getting used to the new world around you? Try putting the “grace” in losing gracefully.

[John Valentine]

Indiana Constitution:
Article One

Section 2. All people shall be secured in the natural right to worship ALMIGHTY GOD, according to the dictates of their own consciences.

Section 3. No law shall, in any case whatever, control the free exercise and enjoyment of religious opinions, or interfere with the rights of conscience.

(credit and thanks to Eternal Vigilance)

[onedoug]

Seems to me in the negative, but nonetheless, that’s what a lot of churches have become.

[Jim from C-Town]

All this says is that if Christianity is correct and Jesus is who he says that he is, a vast majority of people will spend eternity in Hell.Which is exactly what Jesus and MOST religions actually say.

Either there is a God or there isn’t. If there isn’t it doesn’t matter. If there is, lots of people will be very upset with the choices they made in their short lives.

[ansel12]

Never in my life was there a moment where I thought that any bakery that I walked into had to make something for me that they didn’t want to, or that they felt was beneath their standards, or that annoyed them.

When I walk into some small, owner operated, specialty shop, I am making a request, I don’t just hand them an order. I can’t imagine hiring an artistic photographer to creatively capture my wedding, if I know that I, my bride, and my guests, and the event itself, is all repulsive to him, and he is photographing it at the order of the state, like someone picking up trash on the highway, to avoid jail.

[kiryandil]

The Managerial State:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Managerial_state

Paul Gottfried, in After Liberalism, defines this worldview as a "series of social programs informed by a vague egalitarian spirit, and it maintains its power by pointing its finger accusingly at antiliberals." He calls it a new theocratic religion. In this view, when the managerial regime cannot get democratic support for its policies, it resorts to sanctimony and social engineering, via programs, court decisions and regulations...

We're being "Managed"...

[Talisker]

The hatred dripping from Ms. Kohn is quite remarkable.

But then, take away a Leftist’s hatred and you take away the Leftist. They will change whatever position they have to fit whatever needs they have, but they will never, ever give up their hatred. Hatred is literally existential to a Leftist.

That’s what idiot liberals of every sexual persuasion don’t get - concerning their masters, there’s no “there” there.

[Secret Agent Man]

I am sure they already have MCC, PCUSA, UMC, ELCA, and others already there.

[sickoflibs]

RE:”Professor Franke says, “Now is the time to ask whether progressives can use these religious freedom laws, too.” For instance, she could imagine a private business owner in Indiana using the new “Religious Freedom Restoration Act” to challenge the state’s open carry permit law: A private business owner whose sincerely held religious beliefs include peace and non-violence could object to an individual being allowed to enter her store or restaurant with a weapon”

The irony is that most of those things/rights he sarcastically calls for to persecute conservatives and Christians, they do already, freely, like his example above.

Its only when the other (our) side tries to take a single step back do they scream

[RitaOK]

It really is remarkable— the dripping hatred. If this works in favor of the LesGays, and pays off, we’re going to witness more of this than we ever dreamed and sooner than we ever imagined. This is what Fascism looks like.

If we have a predicted major financial correction on the heels of moral collapse, it will be quite awful. Revolutions are painful.

[Teacher317]

First clause of the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights:
"Congress shall make no law ... prohibiting the free exercise thereof" [of religion]

Only operative clause of Indiana Law (which was bill SB101):
"no governmental entity may substantially burden a person's exercise of religion"

Compare and contrast.

[Viennacon]

the Hitler comparison here is unavoidable

[RitaOK]

Her bio reports her as a Soros operator for Community Change, in 2012. She looks like Rachael Maddow and is described as a “community organizer”.

At minimum, she is a full throated Marxist and activist for chaos.

She reportedly was fired by FOX as a contributor in 2013. Hmmm.

[Yosemitest]

TO TOLERATE HOMOSEXUALS IS EVIL.
This is what we get when we FAIL to OBEY God.
For it is written:

“ For whosoever shall commit ANY of these abominations,
even the SOULS that commit them
SHALL BE CUT OFF from among their people. ”

Those who support homosexuals are against our Heavenly Father and His Son Jesus Christ.
These anti Christ people only bring destruction on us ALL.
I have NO sympathy for homosexuals!

Homosexuality is a "Mark" of disobedience.

It was given by our Heavenly Father to test us
to see ... if we will OBEY our Heavenly Father,
and abide by His commandments, statues, and ordinances.

Someone once asked

"Why are they [homosexuals] all so angry?"

The answer is in the definition of "REPROBATE".

rep·ro·bate \ˈre-prə-ˌbāt\ a. [L. reprobatus, reprobo, to disallow; re and probo, to prove.]

1. Not enduring proof or trial; not of standard purity or fineness; disallowed; rejected.


Reprobate silver shall men call them, because the Lord hath rejected them. Jer. 6.




2. Abandoned in sin; lost to virtue or grace.

They profess that they know God, but in works deny him, being abominable and disobedient, and to every good work reprobate. Titus 1.

3. Abandoned to error, or in apostasy. 2Tim. 3.

And the reason"why" is given in the Bible.

God has a cure for homosexuals.

But will we OBEY our Heavenly Father?

"Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect
that God is just,
that his justice cannot sleep forever."

[Squawk 8888]

She doesn’t need one. They do it anyway.

[NetAddicted]

She must think the churches aren’t accepting enough of the homosexual agenda.

[GeronL]

Where would someone start with this mess? None of it makes any sense

[allessior]

It is only becoming the “law of the land” because the judiciary, the increasingly liberal judiciary, is squashing the will of the states, where with minor exception, there is overwhelming support to define marriage as between a man and a woman. Ballots in states defining marriage in this way WIN, but the “men in back” feel that they must correct the wrongs of “the ignorant masses”.

So this argument that it is “increasingly the law of the land” simply breaks down because the law came about from an intrusive judiciary.

It is amazing that those who proclaim “the will of the people to paramount” do everything in their power to make sure thee opposite is true.

Look, homosexuality is obviously abnormal (I did not say “wrong”, I said “abnormal”). This is simply true by matter of logic. There is no reproductive purpose to it. Darwinism would have you believe that eventually the homosexual population would decline because of this. But we know that this does not happen and that plus or minus, the percentage of those who are homosexual remains relatively constant over time. Given the absence of a definitive “gay gene” plus this constancy, the most logical conclusion is that some environmental and/or societal conditions result in homosexual adults.

Get used to it, people of faith and many others just do not agree with the gay lifestyle, do not believe in gay marriage, and DO see homosexuality as abnormal. No amount of hand ringing and forcible “re-education” will change this.

[Amendment10]

"After all, Indiana’s new “Religious Freedom Restoration Act” does just that—it confers special rights on a small minority of citizens and, importantly, their private businesses, to disregard other laws and the constitution [emphases added] and discriminate against other citizens."

With all due respect to Ms Kohn, her understanding of the Constitution must be based on rumors, gossip and hearsay.

More specifically, the states are obligated to comply with the 14th Amendment by not unreasonably abridging constitutionally enumerated rights, most of those rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

14th Amendment, Section 1:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States [emphasis added]; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

And the 1st Amendment-protected freedom of religious expression is one of the rights in the Bill of Rights.

On the other hand, the states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect gay rights issues. So there are no constitutionally enumerated gay rights that pro-gay activist judges or justices can apply to the states via the 14th Amendment. Corrupt judges have gotten away with doing so so far because many patriots probably don’t know the Constitution any better than Ms Kohn does.

And Christian business owners need to bear in mind that “No Gays” signs on their doors may prove to be a stumbling block for people who are struggling with homosexuality but are nonetheless seeking the truth in Jesus.

In fact, 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 indicates that some of the members of that church had been struggling with same-sex sexual relationships but had evidently repented and accepted God’s grace to repent and turn their lives around.

[2ndDivisionVet]

They’re piling on:

Indiana: A Funeral for the Anti-Gay Movement
http://fcnp.com/2015/03/31/indiana-funeral-anti-gay-movement/