Posted on 10/12/2014 11:02:27 AM PDT by B4Ranch
This has been an interesting week for me. I have been discussing with numerous Christian lawyers and judges in three states, a possible solution to the lawsuits LGBT clientele bring forth against Christian Small Business Owners for having strong religious beliefs.
We are all familiar with the lawsuit against the Colorado family-owned Christian bakery that eventually lost their business due to their refusal to bake a wedding cake for two same sex clients.
Then there's the the New Mexico photographer who got sued after declining to photograph a lesbian couple's wedding, citing religious objections.
Or the florist who allegedly refused to provide flowers for a gay wedding because of her religious beliefs is now being sued by the Washington State attorney general.
On and on it goes. These people think they can force us to accept their sexual deviance as being normal behavior. I'm sorry, I can't do that.
When a Christian Small Business Owner hangs a sign in his place of business that reads, "Occasionally, we sub-contract work to other local businesses that meet our standards of quality" hopefully this will protect him from these LGBT clientele who think the world works best when a liberal judge oversees it.
What you are saying with your sign is that you will sub-contract work to others when any of theses situations exist: due to work overload, lack of needed supplies on hand, shortage of personnel when someone is on vacation or off sick or the job is so disgusting that you would prefer someone else do it.
You are not required to announce your religious beliefs to the LGBT client who enter your place of business. You are not refusing the LGBT customer request that he or she employ your company to do work that you advertise you are willing to do. You ask the LGBT client all the normal questions that you would any client. Then you call another Small Business Owner whose religious beliefs are such that they do not interfere with them doing the work under a sub-contract for your LGBT client. You get a bid from the other SBO and relay the cost to your LGBT client. They will then either accept or refuse the bid. In which case they are free to search for another SBO to do their work.
Should they accept your bid, you then call the sub contractor and tell him to proceed with the job as you have outlined it in your previous phone call. He does the work, delivers the product to you, you call the LGBT client and tell them to come in, settle the bill and collect the finished product.
The result is a happy LGBT client who has no reason to bring a lawsuit against you or your firm for refusal of service. You didn't have to handle any offensive material and hopefully your religious beliefs were not too harmed that a few prayers won't mend them.
In the event of this being a photography proposal, the same situation exists. You accept the job, explain what you will need. Then tell the client your price which you will have agreed to ahead of time with another photographer who is not so easily offended. When the job comes up and the other photographer shows up at the site for the job, he only has to say that you are coming down with a cold and didn't want to expose the wedding guests to a possible infection so he is the alternate cameraman. The client will accept or deny entrance to the alternate cameraman, in which case you will return whatever percentage of his deposit that you feel is fair.
Numerous judges and lawyers believe this is a workable solution to the current situation. Please verify this with your company attorney and if it requires any tweaks to fit your state laws don't hold them to yourself. Share the information on how we can protect our businesses!
If you know any Christian business owners please copy this text and email it to them. Perhaps send the URL so they can read any comments that FR members post on the subject.
It’s nice to hear that you are willing to endure bankruptcy which would be the result of denying service to a potential LGBT client under todays laws. The Colorado bakery had a judgement of $150,000.00 set against them. Then there’s the legal fees on top of that.
You are correct, and I don’t like this solution either.
What is it that Christ requires of me? What is my purpose in life? It is to worship and glorify the Triune God.
So... If I owned a bakery that made cakes, I would hang pictures of Jesus and Mary throughout my store and maybe display a rosary or two. Perhaps I would even add some holy water to my cake recipe.
And yes I would bake the cake. If gays are going to be flamboyant in their perversion then I am going to be outwardly demonstrative of my faith. Either they will convert, run out of my store ASAP or leave me alone.
One of the reasons, I believe Christians are losing the narrative is because we have allowed our voices to be silenced once we leave the pews on Sunday (if we even go.)
I think the best approach was suggested by another Freeper months ago. Hang a sign that says all proceeds from gay wedding cages will be donated to anti-gay groups.
In that case, you’re not refusing service. But if they choose to use your services, they are participating in funding their opponents.
Lord help us because this is an area fraught with pitfalls.
What would make more sense would be a 1st Amendment defense connected with the freedom of a particular “press” (in this case the photographer and the cake inscriber). It probably needs to be pushed to the Feds to make it stick, however. And that’s getting weaker daily. There may come a time for stark sacrifice, i.e. so that he will never be lassoed into serving a “gay” wedding, he will not service any weddings.
Or, homosexuality recovery groups... that would be at least a worldly way to fight it.
A while back someone here posted that the business owners should post a sign saying they donate all proceeds from such weddings to reversal therapy organizations.
For that matter... just continuing to muse here... why not only service ex-gay celebrations (e.g. it’s been 10 years since... etc.) There is no analogue in the LGBT world. Unless they want to say they changed and became “gay” X years ago. Which they will never do because that is to cede a tenet.
I have to say right on from a worldly point of view. From strict gospel ethics, it would still be wrong. But it’s less wrong than some other wrong things are.
Nope, that’s not what was discussed.
It’s simple. Cake decorator gives a sheet with a list of names and telephones to call for wedding cakes. Non-wedding cake requests get direct service.
When a call is made to the list, homosexuals are directed away from the Christian business. Traditional wedding cake requests are routed right back to the original bakery.
Result is no homosexual marriage business is transacted with Christian bakery.
The solution is obvious: Just one state needs to decide to end licensing and collecting marriage records.
Is a mohel required to perform circumcisions on Muslim or Christian children?
Sorry, but you have misinterpreted what this whole thng is about. It IS about forcing you to "celebrate" their "love". Sub-contracting out is not going to cut it, because you still are practicing your religion. That must be stopped, or you must be put out of business.
It is your existence, as a Christian, that bothers them, not that you have a business. It seems like a war against Christian businesses; but, it is actually a war against Christians themselves. You must be forced to comply, or else they will ruin you. Period. No other outcome is acceptable to them. They will not accept your compromise. You are not dealing with reasonable people.
Getting a bit off topic maybe, but most mohels will. They offer it as a secular service (and Jewish law does not deem it wrong).
The moral compromise there might be enough to satisfy some. They got the Christian to accommodate them in some manner.
The Christian could say we will give you a blank cake to do with as you please, we ask no questions. But inscribing to a “gay marriage”? Nyet. Not us, not someone we subcontract to.
I was just watching Ted Olsen and Tony Perkins debate this subject on Fox News.
Ted compared this to the civil rights movement’s defense of interracial marriage. He also lied to the host, saying there wasn’t anyone harmed by “gay” marriage in Massachusetts (but Tony responded with the mention of adoption agencies in Massachusetts that had to close).
The civil-rights premise Ted used regarding interracial couples compared to homosexual “marriage” is invalid.
Interracial marriages do not violate Biblical law (Torah/Commandments). Same-sex marriages definitely do offend people of faith.
As we will soon see, these same “civil rights” defenders will mount a legal assault against both churches and entire systems of faith, labeling them “discriminatory” under the law. Soon after, tax-exempt status will be jeopardized for these same faith-based institutions, and they will be blacklisted from doing business or from receiving any type of cooperation from local, state, or the federal government (much like the BSA has experienced).
If people of faith stick to their Biblical belief system, they will have to go underground and worship in secret, just like in any (other) Communist country.
Most interesting. Bump for later consideration.
Fixed It...Endlessly striving to purge political correctness!
Divorcing Christian observance from social approval might have some salutory effects. Christians have been diluting gospel because a diluted gospel was being welcomed. But now the gospel that is welcomed is one that is so (pardon the pun) buggered, that this compromise is no longer acceptable.
American culture being what it is, maybe it will continue to go on in the open in churches for a while. Nobody knows when the slide will stop; perhaps another revival is still in God’s cards once the need for it becomes painfully evident.
Buggery is not the only way homosexuality is expressed. Be accurate when you try to be accurate.
There is nothing you need to say out loud to the LGBT client.
From the thread article.
You are not required to announce your religious beliefs to the LGBT client who enter your place of business. You are not refusing the LGBT customer request that he or she employ your company to do work that you advertise you are willing to do. You ask the LGBT client all the normal questions that you would any client. Then you call another Small Business Owner whose religious beliefs are such that they do not interfere with them doing the work under a sub-contract for your LGBT client. You get a bid from the other SBO and relay the cost to your LGBT client. They will then either accept or refuse the bid. In which case they are free to search for another SBO to do their work.
Should they accept your bid, you then call the sub contractor and tell him to proceed with the job as you have outlined it in your previous phone call. He does the work, delivers the product to you, you call the LGBT client and tell them to come in, settle the bill and collect the finished product.
Quite granted. The question is, are we talking about picky points of the “right way” to do a still-wrong thing. If I am a pimp does that make me clean of the ills of prostitution?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.