Conservative Farm Owners Refuse to Host Gay Wedding, Because Bigotry = Liberty
Here we go again:
The owners of a family farm who are being fined $13,000 for refusing to host a gay wedding ceremony are taking action in an effort to overturn the state’s ruling against them. An attorney for the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal firm, filed a petition in New York State court Thursday on behalf of Cynthia and Robert Gifford, owners of Liberty Ridge Farm. The petition asks that the “sexual orientation discrimination” ruling given by the New York State Division of Human Rights in August be reexamined.
The thing that always gets me about these cases (and blows a hole straight through the “but muh liberty” defense) is that the people always seem to *make it known* that they’re refusing service to gay people. Like, it’s not hard to say “I’m sorry but we’re not fulfilling orders at this time” or “I’m sorry but we’re not available on that date” and most reasonable people would just accept that and move on.
But no, it’s like “You can have the reception here but not your HOMO WEDDING” or whatever. They can’t help but express their bigotry. Sort of like how serial killers in movies always taunt the police.
Let’s jump back a couple hundred years… would the courts have been allowed to force non-slave owners to accept and support the lifestyle choice of slave-owners? Would it be unconscionable for government to force businesses to supply the ropes and restraints used to tie up their slaves or be fined? What if government said that since the general population consumes alcohol and everyone should conveniently be free to drink alcohol wherever they wish… Mormon businesses should be required to provide alcohol to sell to patrons?
First of all, yes, the courts were allowed to force non-slaveholders to accept and support the “lifestyle choices” (holy equivocation Batman!) of slaveholders. Fugitive Slave Act, anyone? Although that was Congress’ doing, not SCOTUS.
And really, would anything of value be lost if this “family farm” put up a disclaimer saying they were only going to host Christian weddings or something? They’re not providing a particularly vital service: it’s not like they’re refusing marriage licenses. Then tolerant people could avoid their services and the farm could enjoy their comfortable bigot-bubble.