I’ve been seeing a number of people posting things to Facebook about the Arizona law that was (sadly) vetoed by the Governor that would have protected business owners from being sued for choosing to not participate in gay marriage functions. The sheer number of people who have come out attacking the law has surprised me.
The fact that the law was even necessary tells me that gay “marriage” isn’t about equality. It’s about forcing the acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle at all costs.
Why do I think this? Marriage is a religious institution. For someone who is a practicing homosexual who is not deluding himself into thinking that he is a Christian, Muslim or Jew, then civil unions would serve the purpose for them. And, if a Christian church were to tell a lesbian couple (as happened in New Jersey) that they couldn’t use their grounds for their ceremony due to their relgious convictions, then bygones should have been bygones. If it was merely about equality, then said lesbian couple would have moved on and found another venue. But it was about more than equality. They wanted to make the church that didn’t agree with their lifestyle suffer, so they went to the liberal courts and threw an “I WANT MY MOMMY” fit and sued. Just like the gay couples sued the bakers in Colorado and Oregon. If we, as Christians, weren’t being forced to personally accept something with which we don’t agree or risk losing our livelihoods, then something akin to legal, civil unions wouldn’t be such a threat.
Let me turn it around a bit. I have a good friend who is gay. He is a very talented artist who has even drawn some of my Adventure characters as portraits for me. I appreciate him and would not let anyone bully him over his lifestyle. He knows that I don’t agree with it and would love to see him get a girlfriend. Now let’s picture me wanting to create a religious tract condemning homosexuality. And I try to hire him to draw the art for it. I would fully expect him to decline, since he would be compromising his beliefs. Would I be right in suing him? If not, then why should a Christian business be able to be sued for not compromising their beliefs?