Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pass the Marriage and Religious Freedom Act
Townhall.com ^ | March 9, 2015 | Star Parker

Posted on 03/09/2015 11:34:36 AM PDT by Kaslin

The Marriage and Religious Freedom Act was introduced in the last Congress – in the Senate by Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) with 11 co-sponsors and in the House by Rep. Raul Labrador (R-ID) with 92 co-sponsors.

This legislation will soon be re-introduced in the current session and should be given priority by Senate and House leadership and passed. It is of enormous national importance.

The bill will protect individuals from discrimination, under federal law, so that they may be free to express and conduct their business according to their religious conviction that marriage is a union between one man and one woman and that sexual relations take place within this framework.

The bill only affects federal law, not state law. But it is an important step in the right direction of establishing a federal legal regime protecting those with traditional biblical faith and convictions regarding marriage, sex, and sin.

This law would not preclude anyone from choosing alternative lifestyles. What it would do is protect those who, because of their faith, reject those lifestyles from being forced to accept them.

Why do we need a new federal law to protect those whose religious convictions see marriage as it has been understood for our whole national history?

Because a war is taking place in our country to delegitimize religion and to use every means of legal aggression to make it impossible for those with traditional biblical faith to live according to their convictions in their public lives.

Take the case of Baronelle Stutzman, a Christian florist in the state of Washington.

When a friend came to her to request a floral arrangement for a same-sex marriage, Stutzman directed that individual to another florist for whom same-sex marriage and same-sex sexual activity is not a violation of religious conviction as it is for her.

She was found guilty of discrimination in a Washington State court. According to the court, “Stutzman cannot comply with both the law and her faith if she continues to provide flowers for weddings as part of her duly-licensed business.”

The court ruling exposes Stutzman to claims for damages and attorneys’ fees from both the state and the couple, from her business and personally. She is liable to lose her business, her home, and her savings.

Or how about Kelvin Cochrane?

After a 34-year career, Cochrane was fired from his position as Atlanta Fire Chief by Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed because he authored a Christian book, in his private time for his private use, in which, in one place, he condemns same-sex sexual behavior and marriage as sinful.

No charges of discriminatory behavior had ever been leveled against Cochrane. In 2009 he was nominated by President Obama, and confirmed by the Senate, as U.S. Fire Administrator. In 2010, he returned to his position with the Atlanta Fire Department and in 2012 was named Fire Chief of the Year.

Cochrane was simply fired for his Christian convictions.

Can it really be, now that homosexual activists have won victories to redefine the meaning of marriage, that anyone adhering in their public life to their traditional religious convictions breaks the law? Will one day a pastor preaching from the pulpit wind up in a lawsuit?

Can it really be that it is not enough for homosexual activists to legally do what they want? That they won’t rest until those that refuse to accept these lifestyles are destroyed?

This is not freedom and this is not America. This is a fight for the heart and soul of our country.

Politicians who give lip service to American freedom but who will not fight for the very values that make our freedom possible, the values on which our nation was built, don’t belong in positions of leadership.

The Republican controlled congress should do everything it can to pass the Marriage and Religious Freedom Act.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: 114th; freedomofreligion; homosexualagenda; marriage; mikelee; starparker

1 posted on 03/09/2015 11:34:36 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Can a federal position be used as a defense or precident in a state court ?

IF the fed has no law, or has language that basically backs the fed out of it, can it be used if, in a state court, someone is being sued ala cakes and flowers ?

2 posted on 03/09/2015 11:39:24 AM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but, they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Pretty sad when it takes an Act of Congress to enforce the First Amendment.


3 posted on 03/09/2015 11:39:53 AM PDT by eyeamok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Its worth it to take a stand and pass this sort of bill, in my opinion.

Obama will veto it, because liberals are in favor of driving people out of business and out of.public life if they don’t endorse homosexual marriage and homosexuality. But it is worth making the case to the public as to why this sort of legislation is a good thing. Expose the liberals for the intolerant storm troopers that they are.


4 posted on 03/09/2015 11:42:53 AM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

my big question: can this be used by muslims to do things like ban jews from their establishments? or otherwise persecute jews and christians? is this a double edged sword?


5 posted on 03/09/2015 11:44:16 AM PDT by camle (keep an open mind and someone will fill it full of something for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

If there is going to be government intervention, seems like it might make more sense to let a proprietor reserve the right to refuse service to a customer. Take the marriage and orientation issues out of the equation.


6 posted on 03/09/2015 11:46:27 AM PDT by IamConservative (If fighting fire with fire is a good idea, why do the pros use water?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I thought that was the purpose of our Constitution.


7 posted on 03/09/2015 11:46:41 AM PDT by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

If I knew you were comin’ I’wouldn`t’ve baked a cake,
baked a cake, baked a cake
If I knew you were comin’ I’wouldn`t’ve baked a cake
Howdya do, howdya do, howdya do?

Had you dropped me a letter, I’wouldn`t’ve hired a band,
Grandest band in the land
Had you dropped me a letter, I’wouldn`t’ve hired a band
And not spread the welcome mat for you

Oh, I do know where you came from
‘cause I do know where you’ve been
But it really does matter
Don`t Grab a chair and don`t fill your platter
And don`t dig, dig, dig right in

If I knew you were comin’ I’wouldn`t’ve baked a cake,
not hired a band, goodness sake!
If I knew you were comin’ I’wouldn`t’ve baked a cake
Howdya do, howdya do, howdya do?

(Instrumental Break)

If I knew you were comin’ I’wouldn`t’ve baked a cake,
baked a cake, baked a cake
If I knew you were comin’ I’wouldn`t’ve baked a cake
Howdya do, howdya do, howdya do?

Had you dropped me a letter, I’wouldn`t’ve hired a band,
Grandest band in the land
Had you dropped me a letter, I’wouldn`t’ve hired a band
not Spread the welcome mat for you

Oh, I do know where you come from
‘cause I do know where you’ve been
But it really does matter
Don`t Grab a chair and don`t fill your platter
And don`t dig, dig, dig right in

If I knew you were comin’ I’wouldn`t’ve baked a cake,
hired a band, goodness sake!
If I knew you were comin’ I’wouldn`t’ve baked a cake
Howdya do, howdya do, howdya do?

Howdya do, howdya do, howdya do?
Howdya do-ooh-ooh-ooh-ooh-ooh


8 posted on 03/09/2015 11:48:47 AM PDT by bunkerhill7 ("The Second Amendment has no limits on firepower"-NY State Senator Kathleen A. Marchione."))))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

BTTT


9 posted on 03/09/2015 11:51:51 AM PDT by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him, and he got them. Now we all have to pay the consequenses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: eyeamok
Pretty sad when it takes an Act of Congress to enforce the First Amendment.

That's what I was going to say.

10 posted on 03/09/2015 2:13:38 PM PDT by Pollster1 ("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson