'Gay' activist straightens me out

I've been telling you how the "gay" world has been mystified and troubled by a series of columns I have penned recently on the way special legal protections for the LGBT crowd have resulted in punishment for those who don't agree.

• The same-sex marriage tyranny
• I guess I hit a 'gay' nerve
• Same-sex wedding: Hire a Muslim caterer

The commentaries have been all the rage in the "gay" press for the last week, with many reports expressing astonishment at what I wrote, but all of them, until now, seemingly unable to counter my point that these laws have resulted in exactly what they allegedly sought to stop – discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

But finally I have been put in my place – straightened out, if you will.

The honors were done by Jeremy Hooper, purveyor of the website goodasyou.org and the author of the gracefully titled tome "If My Zygote Chose Balls."

TRENDING: The heart of 'Pride' is revolution, not equality

What is a photographer who is morally, religiously or ethically indisposed to shooting a same-sex marriage to do? He proposes that to avoid fines and punishment for discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation, the photographer should merely decline the offer by saying he or she is already booked for that date. In other words, the photographer should merely lie to steer clear of prosecution for his or her own sexual orientation.

As he puts it: "A photographer, or most any other vendor, can most always claim to be all booked up on any given day, if he or she doesn't wish to take on the client. When Andrew and I got married, a couple of photographers we approached did in fact say they were unavailable on our chosen wedding day. Were they really, or were they simply not down with shooting a gay wedding? We don't know. But the reason they gave us for turning away our business was unavailability, not judgement (sic), and we accepted that without any further question. If unavailability is the given reason, that typically ends the conversation right there. It's hard to disprove, and few would even try. It's certain that vendors across this nation play the unavailability (or similar) card on a daily basis in order to turn away clients that they simply don't care to take on, whatever the reason."

He adds elsewhere: "If you want to run a public accommodation and you want to flout the law, then you better be ready to face potential consequences from those who push back. Or you better be a good liar."

Why didn't I think of that? Just lie about the reason for turning down the gig.

Experience more of Joseph Farah's no-nonsense truth-telling in his books, audio and video products, featured in the WND Superstore

Well, the reason I didn't think of it (and the reason, I suspect, many other Christians have not gone that route) is because Christians consider it a sin to lie – just as they consider it a sin to engage in homosexual sex or perhaps even to celebrate it by participating in a same-sex marriage ceremony. That's one of those "damned-if-you-do-damned-if you don't" moral predicaments that no citizen of a free country should have to face.

Hooper also comes up with the novel idea that laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation cut both ways – or, perhaps more accurately, all ways: Prohibiting LGBT people from discriminating against heterosexuals. But that's just not intellectually honest. Can anyone point out even one prosecution against a homosexual for discrimination against a heterosexual? No. Does that mean it doesn't happen? No. These laws had one thing in mind when they were crafted and enacted by legislative bodies or, more frequently, dictated by judges – coercively mainstreaming aberrant sexual activity.

In fact, I would suggest most, if not all, of the photographers, caterers, florists, bakers and candlestick makers recently prosecuted, fined and run out of business for declining to support same-sex marriage are victims not only of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation but also of religious bigotry.

Not only have the vast majority of citizens in several states been denied their right to enact laws maintaining the definition of marriage as it has been known since Creation as a union between a man and a woman through judicial tyranny by federal judges, but now we see individuals being punished – even denied their livelihood – by the tyranny of the same-sex marriage cult and so-called "non-discrimination laws."

Through this process, those with religious convictions are given a choice – conform your conscience to the new morality and answer to God, lie and answer to God or find another line of work in which you don't have to hire people or hire yourself out. Some choice.

Media wishing to interview Joseph Farah, please contact [email protected].