Destroying America, One Sin At A Time
By
Michael The Libertarian
My dear readers, I come to you today saddened by recent
events. I wish to speak to you, today about two of those events.
The first is another terrorist attack; again, in New York
City.
An immigrant, a recipient of chain migration largess, publicly
stated his hatred for America and Americans and taunted President
Trump with a social media message saying the president had failed to
protect Americans, as he went off to commit his act of martyrdom.
Luckily, for New Yorkers, Ullah was no better a bomb maker
than he was a master communicator. The bomb detonated before it was
supposed to, doing the most injury to the would-be martyr. According
to reports I've seen he may have ensured that he won't be able to
contaminate the gene pool than he may have already because of the
nature of his injuries.
Of course, C.A.I.R. ([C]ouncil on [A]merican-[I]slamic
[R]elations) has started their usual rhetoric about how the mean old
NYPD and FBI haven't been handling the people involved in the
investigation with kid gloves. CAIR just wants to throw gasoline on
the fire, taunting more martyrs to come out of the woodwork and join
the jihad against the evil blond-haired, blue-eyed devils.
When is this country going to learn that we're involved in a
war and we should stop welcoming enemy combatants with open arms?
When do we open our eyes and realize war has been declared and we're
being invaded?
Already, we're hearing statements by our elected officials
telling us we should consider this “the new normal”. Bless their
hearts.
It is my belief that we're being led, as lambs to the
slaughter on their altar of diversity. God save us.
The second issue is a bit more nuanced, but not by much. While
some (your humble author included) feel it is still an issue of the
subjugation by government fiat, others feel it is a case of “equal
rights”.
I'm referring, of course, to the Masterpiece Cake shop case,
which I like to call: the gay wedding cake case.
Two men were “married” in Massachusetts and returned home
to Colorado to celebrate their happy event. In 2012, the year this
occurred, same-sex unions were legally recognized in the Peoples'
Republic of Massachusetts, but they were not, in Colorado.
They went to the Masterpiece Cakeshop to order their wedding
cake and were denied because the owner and (by all accounts) most of
the employees are Christians and believe homosexuality to be a sin.
The couple left the shop and reported the incident to the
Colorado Civil Rights Commission. Since the Colorado division of the
American Civil Liberties Union Foundation appears on the very
first filing in the case 12 Nov, 2013, I can't help but wonder if
they didn't go to the ACLU first and were directed to the Colorado
Commission by the ACLU who support parts of the constitution, only.
Anyway, the case has wound its way to the Supreme Court of The
United States (SCOTUS) and has become quite the bone of contention.
There's reasons, of course and some of them – in academic circles –
are considered to be “weak”, but that too is a matter of
perspective.
Our Constitution tells us, in a rather definitive fashion, our
rights to worship as we see fit shall not be prohibited, by the
government, but the participation of a state agency since the very
beginning would seem to belie that assertion.
Make no mistake: everything the state does is at the point of
a gun, eventually. Bake a cake for the gay couple. If you don't,
we'll fine you. If you don't pay the fine and change your ways
(that's pronounced: “Abdicate your religious beliefs” for those
of you in Poughkeepsie), we'll shut down your shop. If you continue
to operate, we'll jail you.
I am not unfeeling toward the couple. They believe that
everyone should agree with them and just give them what they want.
That's a nice, feel-good story for anyone that doesn't hold the same
values as Christians.
The couple insists they just want what's fair. I guess that
depends upon how one defines that word. I mean, we're talking about a
wedding cake, here. That's okay. It's important to them. Obviously,
it's important enough where they feel justified in using the
government to force Christians into violating their religious tenets.
To me, it's laughable.
The contention is they were denied “public accommodations”
by way of a Christian baker not making a custom cake for them. That,
too is an interesting perspective, but it's not accurate.
The couple could have purchased any cake, pastry, loaf of
bread, whatever in the shop. The baker probably would have even made
a multi-tiered cake for them. He just wasn't willing to custom
decorate it.
I compare it to something I do, in a very informal way. For
years, I've been making most repairs to my own guitars. Just a few
years ago, I rescued a $500+ guitar from a used guitar “junk bin”.
The guitar was unplayable. Today, it stands as one of the jewels of
my arsenal.
I've done some repairs for friends, all very informally. I've
never “hung a shingle”. I don't advertise. I've never “opened
up shop”, but I've done enough work where some might make the
argument that I am a “public accommodation”.
The other night, a guy called me and asked me if I could do
some custom work on a telecaster®™. He wants some custom paint
which requires removing all parts from the guitar, stripping off the
finish, sanding the existing paint, laying out the paint design,
painting (two colors), and re-finishing. It's involved and I'm happy
to do it.
The question is: what if, instead of copying a guitar he'd
seen on the interwebz, he wanted me to paint “Satan is Lord” on
his guitar? Can I, as a Christian, be forced to violate that tenet of
my faith also?
What happens (as I've mentioned before) when a same-sex couple
decides it's their “right” to be married in a Catholic church?
Does the government step in, then, also?
When are these supposedly knowledgeable lawyers actually going
to read the Constitution?
- Michael
Comments
Post a Comment