Tuesday, December 10, 2013

Perkins: Opposing bigotry is "religious intolerance"

Tony Perkins - Family Research Council
Tony Perkins, head of the hate group, "Family" Research Council, has weighed in on the Masterpiece Cakes matter. As expected, a Colorado judge ruled that the bakery's owner, Jack Phillips, violated the state's anti-discrimination law when he refused to provide a wedding cake for a gay couple. According to a rather perplexing statement by Phillips:
My decision not to participate in the gay weddings is not motivated by politics, i.e., my rights, guaranteed by the first amendment to the U.S. Constitution, or a business decision, or hatred of gays, though I’ve been accused of all these and many other things. My decision is based solely on a desire to live my life in obedience to Him and His Word.

So the guy whipping up cake batter is a participant in a wedding? Free exercise includes the right to discriminate? I wonder if he has a premarital questionnaire to inquire about prior divorces. Would he bake a cake for a bar mitzvah? I digress. Getting back to Mr. Perkins:
"Conceptually," [Judge] Spencer wrote, "[Jack Phillips's] refusal to serve a same-sex couple due to religious objection to same-sex weddings is no different from refusing to serve a biracial couple because of religious objection to biracial marriage."

Like most activist judges, Spencer tries to equate sexual behavior with skin color, a comparison with no basis in science -- or logic. What's more, he tied the case to a Supreme Court suit involving Bob Jones University, in which the justices stripped the college's tax status over its rule against biracial relationships. But, as FRC's Ken Klukowski pointed out, Jack's case is an enormous leap from that decision because the Supreme Court never told Bob Jones that it couldn't hold those views. It simply stripped the university's tax exemption.
Spencer is an "activist" judge because Perkins doesn't like his decision. Perkins would have us believe that this is an issue of comparing skin color to sexual orientation. In point of fact, the law that was violated makes no distinction between the two. The notion that there are differences in "science and logic" is preposterous. Perkins' faith-based statement is untrue and irrelevant.

Relying on Ken Klukowski's legal mind is always hazardous. There is actually no difference between this and the Supreme Court's decision on Bob Jones University. The court is not instructing Phillips what views he must hold. It is instructing him that he must serve gays in accordance with the law

Lost in the vapors.

The real victims are the gay couple who were told “we don't serve your kind here.” One can only begin to imagine Perkins' outrage if a Muslim zealot refused to bake a cake for a Christian wedding (something to do with the Crusades). I sent Klukowski a note challenging him to defend his statement. He has not responded.
Enhanced by Zemanta

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.