In Arizona the governor is under pressure to veto SB1062 which religious groups would like to see passed so that they are not forced to provide certain products or services that violate their religious beliefs in this case it has to do with wedding cakes for LBGT couples (Lesbian Gay Bisexual & Transgender). Meanwhile the LGBT movement itself is evolving into something of a religious movement complete with certain churches lobbying on its behalf and LGBT celebrities and other activists literally proselytizing and propagandizing the public with missionary zeal!
Although it usually is not a good idea to turn away business individuals and private businesses should generally have that right. People should be compelled to provide lifesaving products or services to everyone but forcing individuals and privately owned companies to make wedding cakes that might be topped with a tiny LGBT couple instead of a man and a woman or compelling a photographer to take pictures at an LGBT wedding is a violation of our rights under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Gays have the option to go elsewhere for a cake photos or flowers and their life health or safety is certainly not at risk in this situation.
The slippery slope" argument has little or no validity in this case because other bakers photographers and florists are available to provide the requested services. This case is instead a public relations opportunity and teaching moment" to be exploited for all its worth by LGBT agitators and their allies in their efforts to mainstream their lifestyle.
Will the possible veto of SB1062 simply guarantee LGBT equal rights or will it give them privileges superior to those of other citizens who thought they were protected by the First Amendment. It appears that equal rights are not enough for LGBTs who demand special privileges and want to remake society in an image more to their liking. Can you imagine any of the polygamous groups in Arizona causing such an uproar despite the fact that their controversial officially banned and generally despised lifestyle is not nearly as rare in nature and human history as LGBT relationships.
I am not proposing that the government interfere with what LGBTs do in private but recently they have succeeded in making any questioning of their long term motives akin to a hate crime at least in the public eye. Let them go about their lives without interference but individual states should not be bullied into allowing LGBTs to proselytize and propagandize young people without the other side of the story being told. Opinions contrary to the LGBT world view should be allowed to be freely expressed without the usual hater" label being applied. That tactic has been used for too long to wrongly frame the debate and marginalize the silent majoritys beliefs which in most states is in favor of traditional marriage.
In Arizona the governor is under pressure to veto SB1062 which religious groups would like to see passed so that they are not forced to provide certain products or services that violate their religious beliefs in this case it has to do with wedding cakes for LBGT couples (Lesbian Gay Bisexual & Transgender). Meanwhile the LGBT movement itself is evolving into something of a religious movement complete with certain churches lobbying on its behalf and LGBT celebrities and other activists literally proselytizing and propagandizing the public with missionary zeal!
Although it usually is not a good idea to turn away business individuals and private businesses should generally have that right. People should be compelled to provide lifesaving products or services to everyone but forcing individuals and privately owned companies to make wedding cakes that might be topped with a tiny LGBT couple instead of a man and a woman or compelling a photographer to take pictures at an LGBT wedding is a violation of our rights under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Gays have the option to go elsewhere for a cake photos or flowers and their life health or safety is certainly not at risk in this situation.
The slippery slope" argument has little or no validity in this case because other bakers photographers and florists are available to provide the requested services. This case is instead a public relations opportunity and teaching moment" to be exploited for all its worth by LGBT agitators and their allies in their efforts to mainstream their lifestyle.
Will the possible veto of SB1062 simply guarantee LGBT equal rights or will it give them privileges superior to those of other citizens who thought they were protected by the First Amendment. It appears that equal rights are not enough for LGBTs who demand special privileges and want to remake society in an image more to their liking. Can you imagine any of the polygamous groups in Arizona causing such an uproar despite the fact that their controversial officially banned and generally despised lifestyle is not nearly as rare in nature and human history as LGBT relationships.
I am not proposing that the government interfere with what LGBTs do in private but recently they have succeeded in making any questioning of their long term motives akin to a hate crime at least in the public eye. Let them go about their lives without interference but individual states should not be bullied into allowing LGBTs to proselytize and propagandize young people without the other side of the story being told. Opinions contrary to the LGBT world view should be allowed to be freely expressed without the usual hater" label being applied. That tactic has been used for too long to wrongly frame the debate and marginalize the silent majoritys beliefs which in most states is in favor of traditional marriage.